Commons Chamber

Tuesday 13th May 2025

(began 3 months ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
11:35
11:35
11:36
11:36
11:37
11:37
11:38
11:38
11:39
11:39
11:39
11:39
11:40
11:40
11:41
11:42
11:42
11:43
11:44
11:44
11:45
None Portrait Q2. What assessment he has made of the potential implications for his policies of the situation in Kashmir. (904073)
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

The Foreign Secretary has been clear that it is long-standing policy of British governments that we do not make legal determinations.
11:45
11:45
11:46
11:46
11:47
11:48
11:48
11:49
11:50
11:50
11:51
11:51
11:52
11:53
11:53
11:54
11:55
11:56
11:56
11:57
11:58
11:58
11:59
11:59
11:59
12:00
12:01
12:01
12:02
12:02
12:03
12:04
12:04
12:05
12:05
12:06
12:07
12:08
12:08
12:09
12:09
12:10
12:11
12:11
12:12
12:13
12:14
12:15
12:15
12:15
12:16
12:16
12:17
12:17
12:17
12:18
12:18
12:19
12:19
12:20
12:20
12:21
12:21
12:21
12:22
12:22
12:23
12:23
12:24
12:25
12:25
12:25
12:26
12:27
12:27
12:28
12:28
12:29
12:29
12:30
12:30
12:31
12:31
12:31
12:32
12:32
12:33
12:33
12:34
12:34
12:35
12:35
12:36
12:36
12:36
12:38
12:39
12:40
12:42
12:43
12:44
Julian Smith Portrait Rt Hon Sir Julian Smith MP (Skipton and Ripon, Conservative)
-
-
In his role as the usual channels, Roy Stone had the role working for decades the government Chief Whip, Leader of the Opposition, providing advice to both and protecting confidences of both but answering honestly to each. The usual channels is the only rolling government that works both for the government and the opposition and manages the whips office for both. To the British public, seeing adversarial politics and parties in the chamber, Roy and his team organised and coordinated the legislation, the debates, the recesses, the management of relationships between parties for decades.

Woe betide any Chief Whip but try to change boys recess schedule that was almost always in tandem with the Kent school holiday Every political science course in the country should have dedicated modules on the usual channels and on Sir Roy Stone. The voice of dominant and behind-the-scenes role matey one of the most impactful and consequential civil servant of his time. Mr Speaker, in spite of being fair to all sides, he was political to his core. Not least during the Hung Parliament of Brexit and he had a passionate focus on supporting the government to deliver on the referendum and was increasingly frustrated by us politicians, and particularly me, for failing to deliver a meaningful vote.

He loved his central role in this place, and had the respect if not always agreement from everyone, politician, and civil servant alike. Beneath all the stresses and strains of that the stresses and strains of that most demanding period of parliamentary history, love and commitment to his family shone out. His brother who was ill with cancer His brother who was ill with cancer in the Brexit years, his wife, Dawn, and the children, Hannah and Elliott, in particular for Elliott's Elliott, in particular for Elliott's commitment to the RAF.

A patriot at commitment to the RAF. A patriot at work, a pet patriot at home, rest in peace Sir Roy Stone. peace Sir Roy Stone.
12:47
Gavin Williamson Portrait Rt Hon Sir Gavin Williamson MP (Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge, Conservative)
-
-
Thank you Mr Speaker. Roy was political to his core, he loved this place more than anyone could possibly imagine. He got quite frustrated with government and Prime Minister's on a very regular basis. I always remember on my first day as Chief Whip arriving in office, and you could just see the look of frustration and irritation. Who on earth are they sent me now? He has never been in the whips office. I remember him sitting me down and explaining that he works for me 51% of the time and for the opposition the other 49% of the time.

I kind of wanted him to shift that style a little bit more in my favour but he was never going to do that. And on rather naively requesting as to what maybe I should read, would it be worth me picking up the skin and may, he looked at me and said, "Chief, only strange people and clerks read Erskine May. " But there was not a page in Erskine May that he did not know. And Roy's time, whether starting as an apprentice in the MoD, working through 10 Downing Street, getting briefings ready for prime ministers, and then going into the whips office, it's all equipped him to understand about raw politics.

As anyone who has been Chief Whip all know, actually Chief Whip's don't whip their party, deputies do for top Chief Whip's have to be there to manage the Prime Minister and the cabinets. You are there to save a government from doing incredibly stupid things to themselves. Every single day, or that was the case in my day. I have a feeling it may be has not changed that much in this time. You will sometimes come into the office and Roy's eyes would roll as he had heard and seen the news of the latest decision that had emanated out of number 10.

But what he would always do, he would sit down with you, talk to the problem and actually give you solutions, give you a potential way out of the awful mess. The message you find yourself in. I particularly recall the day after the 2017 general election. For those who weren't here, it had not gone quite as well as we had hoped. And I walked into the Chief Whip's office and, it was a beautiful office over in Downing Street. And I arrived there, and Roy was good, as good as any man, I won't say the word but it rhymes with clucking.

And he said " You clucking screwed that up didn't you? " What will you that up didn't you? " What will you do? And it was a time when the Prime Minister was in shock are not doing an awful lot and it fell to the whips office to work out how you took things forward. Sitting down with Roy, working out as to how we took it forward, that was what was so essential in terms of putting together a deal with the Democratic Unionist Party to make sure that the honourable member for Islington did not have the opportunity to form a government in 2017.

He was a man that lived and breathed politics. But also a man that cared nothing more than about his family. You would hear him talk with such pride about his daughter at university, about his daughter at university, his son he took to countless events, as he did his swimming, and he got involved in the RAF. But all in all, involved in the RAF. But all in all, Roy was a good friend. Just a few weeks ago, sitting down with him and weeks ago, sitting down with him and having coffee, just talking about his family.

Talking about some of his family. Talking about some of the difficult times but also some of the amazing times. He will be so missed.
12:51
12:53
Alistair Carmichael Portrait Rt Hon Alistair Carmichael MP (Orkney and Shetland, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Can I Thank you Mr Speaker for allowing these exceptional but fitting tribute which I'm sure will give some comfort to Sir Roy Stone's wife and family for top it was my privilege to work with him during the first 3 1/2 years of the coalition government. A coalition government or something that had never been done in this country in peacetime. It was something that required the service of not one party but two in the government. And that brought from him a time of change and challenge, these were all challenges that he took incredibly in his stride.

There were many anecdotes I could tell you, and to many who would be involved are still alive. So I fear for all sorts of reasons there are limits to how far one can push Parliamentary privilege. The genius of Sir Roy Stone was that he never betrayed any personal political view of his own. That was how he was able to serve governments of all stripes. The dignity of Parliament and the dignity of the business of government or something that really mattered to him.

It actually was that concern for the dignity that allowed me on only one occasion to see Sir Roy when the mask slipped. It was the early days of the coalition government. The Liberal Democrat whips office was in the business of babysitting. On this occasion an actual literal baby, not the normal babysitting that the whips office is called upon to do. Inevitably, as babies do, there was a need for a nappy to be changed. I took the baby I think it was Jenny Willits's son into my office, I had laid him on the sofa and I was in the process of changing the nappy when Sir Roy Stone appeared in my office.

One glimpse at the look on his face told you that this scene just realised the worst fears he had ever had about having liberal Democrats nearby. The truth is Mr Speaker, Sir Roy was a man who cared about both government and Parliament. And actually to be able Parliament. And actually to be able to serve both requires very distinctive and particular talents. distinctive and particular talents. It was a privilege to work with him and to have the benefit of these talents, and for those who mourn him, especially his family, the him, especially his family, the recognition of the talent should be an enduring comfort.

Thank you.
12:56
12:58
12:59
Torsten Bell Portrait Torsten Bell MP, The Parliamentary Secretary, HM Treasury (Swansea West, Labour)
-
-
I'm happy with the tributes to Sir Roy Stone. He will always be in our thoughts. Let us move on to the Shadow Chancellor Mel Stride. If she

**** Possible New Speaker ****

will make a statement on the Mansion House Accord. Thank you Mr Speaker. Can

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Mr Speaker. Can associate myself with the tributes to Sir Roy Stone who was a true public servant and a servant of this public servant and a servant of this house. Pensions matter, they underpinned not just the retirement we all look forward to the investment our future prosperity investment our future prosperity depend upon. This morning, 17 workplace pension scheme providers, workplace pension scheme providers, between the managing about 90% of active savers find contributions, active savers find contributions, signed the Mansion House Accord.

It was proposed and developed by the industry, specifically by that Lord Mair, and it builds on the work of the former Chancellor who is in his the former Chancellor who is in his place today. Signatories to the Accord have pledged to invest 10% of the main default found in private the main default found in private assets by 2030. These are productive assets that boost the economy such as infrastructure. At least 5% will be for UK assets. This investment be for UK assets.

This investment could support better outcomes for savers and deliver growth finance to Britain's world leading Science and Technology businesses. But also support clean energy to elements across the country, delivering greater energy security and jobs. The shift towards greater investment in private assets is a journey the secretary is already on. Everyone recognises UK defined conservation schemes stand out relative to their international peers for how little they invest in these areas. This is right for savers because it is in their interest for pension funds to hold a diverse range of assets.

And it is in Britain's interest. This government wants to see higher investment levels in the UK stop we cannot continue with the lowest business investment in the G7 as we Supply of capital is part of that and we will release 25% into the economy by 2030, but so is a supplier of products to invest in the pipeline. Our job is to support the depth and visibility of the pipeline and that is why we are getting this country building once again.

The accord is an industry led again. The accord is an industry led agreement. Nevertheless, the decision to invest in more productive assets to infrastructure will support better outcomes for savers and faster growth for Britain. In the coming weeks, we Britain. In the coming weeks, we will be publishing the investment will be publishing the investment review to support the move to bigger and better pension schemes and we and better pension schemes and we will implement the reforms to improve returns for savers in the forthcoming pension scheme spell and I look forward to presenting it to this house.
13:02
Mel Stride Portrait Rt Hon Sir Mel Stride MP (Central Devon, Conservative)
-
-
I start by associating myself with the very fine tributes made to Sir Roy Stone and my condolences go to his family. No response from the Chancellor we see that can I thank the honourable gentleman for his statement. Millions of UK savers rely on careful management of pension funds. Those pension providers have a judiciary duty to act in the best financial interest of their members. We support efforts to ensure we are investing in assets which can increase productivity and growth and deliver stronger and stable returns for investors and savers.

But was the purpose of the first mansion house compact which was brokered in the last Conservative government. As well we know, Labour ministers have a habit of thinking they know best what it is to do with other people's money. It should ultimately be the responsibility of the providers have been entrusted by savers with their money to make investment decisions. Reports the government intends to take new pounds to mandate pension funds to allocate minimum amounts to classes of assets should be a matter of great concern to this house.

So can the Minister confirm whether the government does intend to take such legislative powers in the pensions bill later this year? If he cannot rule out making such a move, can he explain what this would mean for the existing duties set out in legislation? Major players in the industry have reportedly refused to take part in the latest iteration of the mansion house compact including Scottish Widows. Kenny honourable gentleman explained the housewife that is? What discussions has he had with Scottish Widows and others who have chosen not to take part in what concerns they have raised.

Let me be clear that we want an industry that is investing UK business infrastructure and other elements infrastructure and other elements that drive a healthier economy. That has to be for the benefit of savers. has to be for the benefit of savers. And of course, the risks here would be borne entirely by private sector be borne entirely by private sector workers while public sector workers would be protected. Let me make one final point. On this side of the final point. On this side of the house, we are very clear that pension savings should never be pension savings should never be there to dig a Chancellor out of the economic poll that she has made.
13:04
Torsten Bell Portrait Torsten Bell MP, The Parliamentary Secretary, HM Treasury (Swansea West, Labour)
-
-
Thank you. I will address two questions and then come to the overall shadow chancellor. On the question of foundation raised, there has been a debate on the wider industry about mandating and UK equities. That has been led by peers for some members in this house, including the Conservative member for Salisbury. We are setting out a voluntary agreement led by the industry, so I will leave his contribution to that debate. 90% of the defined contribution by active savers have signed up to the accord this morning and all of those are committed to the idea of more investment in private assets, but more generally, it is disappointing because the truth is he is a lonely figure.

There is a wide consensus to invest in private assets and today's accord is industry led which sets benchmarks by the industry and many players want to go further, and there should be cross-party consensus and the Chancellor spelt out that this work builds on the work of her predecessor in supporting the 2023 mansion house compact and he will remember that because it was signed under a Conservative government when he was the Pensions Secretary, and he was in a press release championing it.

He was right then and he is letting He was right then and he is letting himself down now. I have some news just in because a response to the court has come this morning from Guy court has come this morning from Guy Opperman. Members will him because he is the former Tory member for Hexham and the only Conservative pensions minister the last pensions minister the last government to last more than five minutes. He was in his post for five minutes. He was in his post for five years and what he say? He said it was a good thing and should be welcomed.

He is not wrong. welcomed. He is not wrong.
13:07
13:08
Torsten Bell Portrait Torsten Bell MP, The Parliamentary Secretary, HM Treasury (Swansea West, Labour)
-
-
where they have already embarked on this path? It has long been an opportunity of long-term investment to invest in rental opportunities. How can we drive the opportunities in the sector through this, and finally, the Minister quite rightly talks about a pipeline of opportunities as this may be a life opportunity to agree with development of the airport, but many of our communities are worried about the collapse of our town centres and there could be buckets of opportunity highlighted their that could be driven for appropriate investment with reliable sources.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. It is characteristically bold to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It is characteristically bold to welcome these measures. The member's right to raise the question of Australia and Canada, and we look Australia and Canada, and we look for we have more similar pension schemes to those in the UK and the levels of private asset allocation levels of private asset allocation is far higher that we see here in the UK. On the two specific points the UK. On the two specific points he raises, I agree on investment in social rented sector and many of our pension funds are already doing so.

pension funds are already doing so. I notice other ones will have announcement in the area ahead. He raises the breadth of investment raises the breadth of investment opportunity and he is right that we need to look at national live level need to look at national live level products but they are more local products, and where they are financed by the private sector, financed by the private sector, private schemes may want to look at

**** Possible New Speaker ****

those as well. Can the Minister spell out how this deal provides real change for our constituents across the country, but also, what it means for infrastructure on housing?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think my friend for his question and he is absolutely right. There is no way that Britain can return to growth unless it starts being a country investing in its future, and that is what we have future, and that is what we have been doing. It is part of a wider story, and there is hopefully cross-party consensus across the industry and across the colonists
13:10
13:11
13:12
13:13
13:14
13:15
Torsten Bell Portrait Torsten Bell MP, The Parliamentary Secretary, HM Treasury (Swansea West, Labour)
-
-
business of pounds of taxpayers money is used to enrich the size of pension schemes in terms of tax reliefs so I would urge the Minister to continue to engage with the city. I welcome voluntary commitments but we have got to come to the point where these schemes, their risk aversion needs to be called out when we think about the amount of taxpayers money that is effectively going into them. With the Minister continue to look carefully at the options available given that the previous government will seek to previous government will seek to I thank him for his question and enjoy discussing these things as we have done over recent months.

He offers a recognition of the challenge facing the country, and very much better position his Front Benchers adopting today focusing on what we can do to change things. I recognise the point he is making about risk aversion. And this is one of the areas where I'm glad to see that we are seeing progress coming. I take a slightly more positive view in terms of the consensus that things need to change. I think we are seeing that in the pensions industry more generally, partly that investing in a wider range of assets, but also embracing the gender that we are setting out for pension fund that can take different amounts of risk.

He asks about public entities. My view today is public entities. My view today is that the accord from the industry support that by funding a pipeline of companies who can grow to the level where they can list publicly. But also private assets will include But also private assets will include private shares. I think it is a slightly more positive picture than he is painting but I'm not hiding from the wider question his making about capital markets will stop UK governments, and my colleague that governments, and my colleague that City canister are focused on that.

I look forward to further conversations on that. conversations on that. How will my honourable friend bring together UK pension schemes together with UK local and regional governments to invest in local infrastructure project? Given that European and global pension schemes often invest when UK pension funds

**** Possible New Speaker ****

do not. My honourable friend asks a great question. We will have more to say on this in the months we come
13:18
13:18
13:19
13:19
13:20
13:20
13:21
13:21
13:22
13:23
Torsten Bell Portrait Torsten Bell MP, The Parliamentary Secretary, HM Treasury (Swansea West, Labour)
-
-
I thank your lazy for the question. She is right to see the boxes higher engagement levels with young people today and investing more broadly. Whenever I go into a more broadly. Whenever I go into a school sixth form a surprising volume of the questions are not unfortunately for me and what government is doing and how we get growth up but on how we make a lot of money quite quickly. We support the level of engagement and active the level of engagement and active engagement.

On the points races I would say two thing. Schemes themselves are required to set out what their policy approaches. And what their policy approaches. And many pension schemes will provide options for members in terms of how they wish their funds to be they wish their funds to be invested. Nothing that has been set out today in terms of the accord comes between those approaches. comes between those approaches. Thank you Mr Speaker. May I warmly welcome the Mansion House Accord. During the last Parliament I had the pleasure of taking part in a cross-party visit with the then member for Hexham to see a solar farm which is funded by pension investments.

A wonderful scheme close to the M4 in my constituency. Could the Minister say more about how the announcement today will support much broader investment in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

green transition, both in the south of England and across the country? I thank my friends I have also

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my friends I have also benefited from conversations with him about this topic given his previous experience. He is previous experience. He is completely right to set out one of the large recent we need to move to
13:25
13:26
13:26
13:27
13:28
13:29
13:29
13:30
13:31
13:31
13:32
13:33
13:34
13:34
13:35
13:35
13:36
13:36
13:37
13:38
13:39
13:40
13:40
Olivia Bailey Portrait Olivia Bailey MP (Reading West and Mid Berkshire, Labour)
-
-
I think the honourable member due to his experience will know the matter is not down to the chair. But he will also appreciate that the Speaker doesn't respect timely responses to backbench correspondence and requests for answers to questions. No doubt not only has the member put his point on record, but the Treasury frontbench will relay that swiftly to the appropriate department. The Ten Minute Rule Motion. A34 Slip Road Safety. Olivia Bailey.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I beg to move leave be given to bring in a bill to provide for the review of the safety of the A34 review of the safety of the A34 sliproad at East Ilsley and Beedon and require the publication of plans to address any deficiencies in to address any deficiencies in safety identified by the review. My constituency of Reading West and Mid Berkshire is home to some beautiful Berkshire is home to some beautiful rural villages. (East Ilsley and Beedon) Bill are nestled in the North Wessex Downs and are prime examples.

Both villages are mentioned in the Domesday book of 1086 and for centuries have been home to West Berkshire families. Both have beautiful grade 1 listed Both have beautiful grade 1 listed churches. Rich agricultural traditions and a vibrant community. Many residents of these idyllic Many residents of these idyllic villages use the A34 every day to get to work, take children to school, and travel to Oxford, school, and travel to Oxford, school, and travel to Oxford, To get onto the a 34, they first had to make a perilous journey down what must be some of England's's most dangerous slip roads.

Especially southbound at East Ilsley and northbound at Beedon, they are intimidating and dangerous. Even for experienced drivers. National Highways data shows in the five years up to 2023, there were tragically multiple fatalities, and many serious accidents at these slip roads. My constituents tell me of many more near misses. In fact 91% of the nearly 500 people who filled out my survey on the sliproad's have personally experienced issues on the sliproad. 96% agreed the sliproad sliproad. 96% agreed the sliproad were dangerous.

In the words of my constituents Jenny, who told me the lack of visibility is treacherous, and the sliproad are way too short, and the sliproad are way too short, Karina who said using the sliproad feels like dicing with death, especially in winter when it is dark and raining. Joe and Steve told me they often have to break to stop on the sliproad as there are no spaces in the nearside lane to enter the flow of traffic. Even experienced drivers find the sliproad is the drivers find the sliproad is the most stressful part of any journey.

Helena feels concerned for her children's safety as they use the sliproad to commute to work. Nicola's son sadly experienced the car pileup due to a lack of visibility. My constituents should not feel afraid commuting to work or afraid every time their child drives into town. Residents feel like the situation is only getting worse. Arabella, my constituents, told me the roads are getting more dangerous as the traffic on the A34 increases and that volume of traffic, including heavy goods vehicles, is rerouted through the narrow rural lanes of these small villages, where accidents lead to road closures.

Instead of dicing with death, my constituents words, many residents choose to avoid these slip roads and instead joined the air 34 in West Illsley, adding significant time to their journeys, and increasing their journeys, and increasing traffic on the rural lanes. Others are thinking about leaving the villages altogether. My constituent Nick is one of those too concerned Nick is one of those too concerned The human impact of these slip roads is my primary concern. There is also a knock-on effect on economic growth.

The A34 is an economically significant road, connecting the major ports of the south-east with industrial heartlands in the Midlands. Every time there is an accident, the not on disruption not only prevents people from getting to work on time, but impact on businesses relying on those deliveries. The situation is clearly not sustainable and something must be done. After raising the issue with the roads minister, who I am glad to see in her place today, in Parliament in February, and meeting with the National Highways regional director to discuss my survey findings, I took the National Highways route manager on a site visit to (East Ilsley and Beedon) Bill experience the issue first hand.

We spent the morning having to accelerate along the sliproad, grappling with short bends and blind spots and dodging HGVs. It was obvious to everyone in the car my constituents are right to be alarmed. I am proud this Labour government is committing to improving the safety of English roads. We are delivering the first road safety strategy in more than a decade and have provided 4.8 billion of funding for National Highways next year. I welcome the fact National Highways will be investing in safety measures in the short I know that this government can deliver tangible change and the slip road at East Ilsley urgently needs the improvements and that is why I'm delighted to urge the government to provide a comprehensive review of the safety of these dangerous roads and ensure necessary adjustments are made as soon as possible.

National Highways have suggested that if you. I want to see this delivered quickly, alongside any necessary improvements. My right honourable friend has made it clear that the Department are focused on improving safety for road users and I look forward to working with her to make that a reality for my constituents. Before I finish, I must note that I am not the only person who has taken this issue on and I would like to pay tribute to all of those who have made the case for change.

This includes but is not limited to local residents, the A34 action group, the local honourable members and our predecessors. This has truly been a cross-party endeavour and I'm grateful for the support of colleagues from across the legal spectrum. We all want the same thing - a safer A34 and I'm taking on that excellent work with this campaign. When my constituents's car broke down, she called the AA and when she told them where she was from, they immediately knew that it was the village with the dangerous slippers, East Ilsley.

I want the ability to be known for the unique heritage, not how dangerous the slip roads are. By delivering the review and the right safety measures, we can make the slip roads safer for all

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and make a big difference for our community. The question is that the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that the honourable member have leave to bring in the bill. As many as that bring in the bill. As many as that opinion, say, "Aye." The ayes have it. Who will bring in the bill?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

it. Who will bring in the bill? the Member for Dibley, and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the Member for Dibley, and A34 A34 Slip A34 Slip Road A34 Slip Road Safety A34 Slip Road Safety (East A34 Slip Road Safety (East Ilsley and Beedon) Bill.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and Beedon) Bill. Second ring, what they? Friday, what they?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Friday, what they? Friday, June 13. We move on to the afternoon debate. We come to the motion in the name of the Leader of the Opposition on the UK-EU Summit. the Opposition on the UK-EU Summit.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I call on Alex Burton to move the motion. The I beg to move that the motion

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I beg to move that the motion that stands in the name of my right honourable friend, the Leader of the Opposition, myself, and other right
13:50
13:52
Alex Burghart Portrait Alex Burghart MP (Brentwood and Ongar, Conservative)
-
-
Accelerator and vanished. He went into strange new forms that we are not his own. Every time the Prime Minister speaks I wonder which body he has hopped into now. Is it the Prime Minister who spent his early life chastising all immigration law on the grounds that it was racist? on the grounds that it was racist? Or the Prime Minister who has newfound love of strict immigration newfound love of strict immigration newfound love of strict immigration rules? Prime Minister who promised to protect winter fuel payments or the one who cast them away? The the one who cast them away? The Prime Minister who promised to protect farmers and then did not? protect farmers and then did not? The Prime Minister who said he knew what a woman was and then changed his mind.

The Prime Minister does not know what he stands for of which way he looks and that, in negotiations, is a very difficult negotiations, is a very difficult thing. Our position is simple, Madam thing. Our position is simple, Madam Deputy Speaker. There can be no going back. This side of the House going back. This side of the House fought a long and hard battle to take control of laws, borders, money. And with those powers, Madam Deputy Speaker, it succeeded in securing 70 new trade deals and the fastest vaccine rollout in Europe.

And the naysayers and dismal voices on the other side of the House have said it will come to nothing but in said it will come to nothing but in the 2015... I look forward to correcting the honourable gentleman on his position. UK international trade stood at just over £1 trillion a year but by 2023, it stood at £1.6 billion a year and this was in spite billion a year and this was in spite of exit.

-- Brexit. The concern is that the government has proven itself to be a terrible negotiator, really terrible. We have previously heard the administration talk about the need for ruthless pragmatism and one can only wonder whether it is the same ruthless pragmatism that divides the Chagos deal. When I was a history teacher, we used to say they were still in history was the deal the people of north-east America did with Dutch settlers when the giveaway Manhattan Island for 60 guilders and handful of beans.

They guilders and handful of beans. They did not spend £18 billion giving away territory, as the government has. Is it the same ruthless pragmatism that immediately gave up £9.4 billion in pay rises above inflation to unionised sectors in return for nothing at all? No agreements on productivity, reform, at all. Was it the same ruthless pragmatism that saw the collapse of the £450 million AstraZeneca deal or the botched steel mess we had to return during the recess four or perhaps the same ruthless pragmatism that led to the missed opportunities of the US tariff agreement the other day.

My concern is that this will happen again. What we have heard... I would love to give way to the honourable gentleman. I am ever so grateful. I wish I could say I was enjoying this but that would be stretching it too far. Does he not understand that they are as hard Brexiteers as he is. How much damage does this have to do until they

**** Possible New Speaker ****

start to look at this seriously? I always have respect and time for the wisdom of the honourable for the wisdom of the honourable gentleman but the Opposition are not gentleman but the Opposition are not hard Brexiteers, just today, tomorrow, who knows? We know that tomorrow, who knows? We know that tomorrow, who knows? We know that they were against leaving the EU and then they changed their minds and those who change their minds on fundamental issues might change them fundamental issues might change them back and turn on a sixpence and do it again.

The fact of the matter is the government presented negotiations with no clear negotiations with no clear objectives and with red lines are so objectives and with red lines are so thin and washed out as they can be quickly discarded. Today is an opportunity for the Labour Party to opportunity for the Labour Party to come clean about what it was and what it is to be because it will what it is to be because it will have to vote on the motion which sets out our red lines, which are very clear and precise and in very clear and precise and in keeping with the will of the British

**** Possible New Speaker ****

people. I will give way. The right honourable member talks about the motion of the official about the motion of the official opposition being precise and it conflates freedom of movement with youth mobility. If youth mobility is youth mobility. If youth mobility is good enough for Australia, Canada, Uruguay, it does not run against the red lines for freedom of movement.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

red lines for freedom of movement. Does he understand that? Freedom of movement for young people, isn't it? We are asking for people, isn't it? We are asking for the Labour Party to set out what is clear position is. I will explain clear position is. I will explain why that is important. The fact is that what we have seen up until this that what we have seen up until this point is chaos and I am sure that it is easy for the Labour Party to is easy for the Labour Party to understand because on February 24, we will have heard the Home we will have heard the Home Secretary rule out this and say they will not look intimate but at the beginning of March the Postmaster beginning of March the Postmaster General suggested he was open to it but then on April 24 he ruled it out, the Paymaster General.

I'm sorry. Again, he ruled it out. But then, at the beginning of May, the Paymaster General ruled once again and it did not end with the youth mobility scheme. The pan-European Mediterranean area, on January 23, it was ruled out. Three days later, the Chancellor said that they were looking at it and am 33, it was ruled out again. -- On February it was ruled out again. -- On February 3. The government does not know what it is doing, what it wants to achieve, it has no objectives and has very blurred red lines.

There is an emerging sense that this will be... There is an emerging sense that this will be a good deal for the EU and the balance of benefits will run against the UK because, despite the fact the government do not want to give a running commentary and are content to give it to the press, the demands are being met in the negotiations and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm happy to give way. He quotes 'Quantum Leap' and the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He quotes 'Quantum Leap' and the thing with Samuel Beckett, he kept leaping into the past because he could not deal with the future. I could not deal with the future. I hope the honourable gentleman will agree that one of the important things about next Monday will be the security and offence partnerships security and offence partnerships that we can move forward on and given the threat posed by Putin, can he put aside his blindness to the he put aside his blindness to the benefits of cooperating with Europe and agree that would be a good thing to secure? I am glad to be the one to break it to the honourable lady to break it to the honourable lady that we already cooperate with Europe One Defence and have done for a very long time.

She will now the a very long time. She will now the cornerstone of Defence is and always cornerstone of Defence is and always has been NATO since the Second World has been NATO since the Second World War and, today, it is a good moment to remember that because today is the 85th anniversary of the first speech as Prime Minister given by Sir Winston Churchill from the dispatch box before this chamber was bombed and he gave his blood, sweat and tears speech and it is incredibly important that we cooperate with our European partners on Defence but that is why we do it and that is why we spend over 2.5%, this side of the House would like to spend 3% and more on Defence, largely to help defend Europe and there is no reason, because the government has not set out for it.

We know of no reason why NATO is We know of no reason why NATO is We know of no reason why NATO is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We have British firms calling for cooperation with European allies because of increased defence costs across Europe so what would the shadow Minister say when this government is calling for a security deal? Does he not agree we should

**** Possible New Speaker ****

have one with the EU? If the terms of the deal are the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

If the terms of the deal are the UK has to pay in order to access that fund, we must ask very serious questions of our European allies questions of our European allies about why we should have to contribute when we are already contribute when we are already committed to their security. It is for the government, if they choose for the government, if they choose to go down that route, to explain why that should be the case. The truth is NATO must continue to be truth is NATO must continue to be the cornerstone of our defence.

It must continue to be the cornerstone of our defence. Of course there are reports over last weekend that the EU may be inserted into our chain of command. That would be a very significant change. From a sedentary significant change. From a sedentary position he says that is nonsense. I am pleased to hear that but he has not had the opportunity to tell the House that is the case. It was clear that somebody in government, or somebody within the EU, was briefing journalists over the weekend that this might be the case.

No, I think the honourable gentleman needs to take responsibility for his special advisers. But if there is to be a defence pact, it is for the government to set out why it would

**** Possible New Speaker ****

make us safer. One thing that always slightly puzzled me about this position the puzzled me about this position the government has taken, a bit like the Chagos Islands, we already own the islands and then we went into negotiation to give them away or rent them back, so this position, Europe threatens us so we cannot Europe threatens us so we cannot talk about other matters until we sign up for this defence deal. But we already have a defence deal and already cooperate. We built weapons already cooperate.

We built weapons with France, Sweden and various with France, Sweden and various other countries. So what is it we actually gain from this rather than

**** Possible New Speaker ****

what they would lose? My right honourable friend has a great deal of experience in these areas and makes a very important point. It is for the government to set out why this would be in the United Kingdom's interests. In a United Kingdom's interests. In a moment. The summit is next week. So moment. The summit is next week. So far the government has not yet done

**** Possible New Speaker ****

so. I'm happy to give way. I think it is important to recognise the last government reduced our army to the size last reduced our army to the size last seen in the Napoleonic era so we should take no lectures on defence from them. The people that will benefit our defence contractors in my constituency struggling to sell components to the EU since Brexit and have had to cancel contracts, affecting jobs all over the West

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Midlands. When I first arrived in this House the leader of his party was advocating leaving NATO and giving up Trident. I will take no lectures up Trident. I will take no lectures up Trident. I will take no lectures from his side of the house. My party has committed to 3% defence spending. I think defence contractors in his constituency would like to see a Conservative government and have some of that money spent on his patch. So we have no... I give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

no... I give way. Would my right honourable friend like to disabuse the Honourable like to disabuse the Honourable members opposite who seem to be under the impression that whatever under the impression that whatever money we put in, somehow our defence contractors in the UK will get more out of the fund than were contributing? The history of defence contributing? The history of defence procurement in Europe is France and procurement in Europe is France and Germany invariably make sure that they get more out of it than they put in and we are always the losers.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

put in and we are always the losers. I don't think we are suddenly going to become winners when we are not a member of the EU. My right honourable's friend

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My right honourable's friend experience speaks volumes. The truth is we have to be certain this will not just be another scheme for funnelling money into French defence companies and keeping them away from defence companies in other

**** Possible New Speaker ****

jurisdictions. I give way. Does he share my hope that in the negotiations next week, the negotiations next week, the government makes it clear to our European partners that over decades this country has contributed to our collective defence well above our collective defence well above our economy or population all size and economy or population all size and Europe has benefited from that? I am in no way recommending a Trumpian approach but it is important in approach but it is important in these negotiations that the these negotiations that the government makes it clear the scale of our contribution to collective defence.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

defence. I fully agree with the remarks made by my right honourable friend. made by my right honourable friend. The UK has made disproportionately high unnecessary contributions to European defence over many decades. -- And necessary. They were right to do so and I hope they do so in future but it is only right our friends recognise that contribution and do not treat us as an external power coming to parlay but rather as a close, long-term friend whose loyalty has already been proved many times over.

We would also do well to get clarification today from the government on their position on EU law making. I was lucky enough to have a call with my right honourable friend Sir William Cash this morning. It was an unusually brief call. It only lasted 20 minutes. Sir Bill put it very clearly to me. He said that in any new arrangement with the EU, it is very important we see no EU law making, no jurisdiction for the European Court of Justice, and no attempt to reapply the principles of EU law in reapply the principles of EU law in our court.

That is because one of the principles of our departure from the EU was that we would take back control of our money, our borders and laws. With that I give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The honourable member is quite right to say there must be no further surrendered to EU law. But in the same vein, is there not a in the same vein, is there not a need to recover territorial integrity of the United Kingdom? I represent a party in the United Kingdom where in 300 areas of law it Kingdom where in 300 areas of law it is not this House that makes the laws but a foreign parliament. Should the starting point of a reset not be recovering territorial

**** Possible New Speaker ****

not be recovering territorial The matter? The honourable gentleman makes a good point which has been raised in this House before and I look forward this House before and I look forward to him raising it with the Minister in a few moments. On fish, we are clear that there should be no clear that there should be no multi-year deal because to do so reduces the UK leveraging future negotiations with the EU. We should have 12 nautical miles exclusive have 12 nautical miles exclusive access.

That is what our fishermen want and what the Conservative party supports. There should be fair distribution of quota schemes and new trade barriers during a dispute. The shadow Secretary of State for the environment farming and rural affairs has been very clear about this. This is an opportunity to defend UK fishermen and build on the deal that we had from the Brexit negotiations previously. We should

**** Possible New Speaker ****

not be giving up freedom for our fishermen. I'm happy to give way. It is important to remember their

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It is important to remember their history. There was no Common Fisheries Policy until the prospect of the British joining the common of the British joining the common market arose. Then they created one simply so they could rip us off.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

simply so they could rip us off. And isn't that the truth? Here is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And isn't that the truth? Here is an opportunity for the government to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

an opportunity for the government to give guarantees and securities. Happy to give way. He is talking about fishing

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He is talking about fishing rights. But under his government, the UK catch dropped by 80%, is that correct? Will he apologise for the correct? Will he apologise for the damage he and his party did to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

UK fishing industry? We are the party that took fishermen out of the Common Fisheries Policy, which is something that the fishing communities wanted. We very much hope that this government is not going to concede the rights that were hard-won in those negotiations. I give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the shadow Minister. Has he quantum lept into a body where

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Brexit has been a huge success? SPECT -- If he heard my opening remarks, he would have heard that in 2015, the volume of UK trade was just over £1 trillion. By 2023, in spite of £1 trillion. By 2023, in spite of Brexit, that had gone up to £1.6 trillion. I think sometimes the trillion. I think sometimes the people on the other side of the argument, many of whom had understandable concerns, we were understandable concerns, we were making a big change which had not making a big change which had not been made in over 40 years, many of them seem I think trapped like Doctor Samuel Beckett in the past.

Unable to realise that there had Unable to realise that there had been significant improvements in the UK's trading position because of the freedoms we acquired and because of the trade deals the previous government brought in. If the honourable gentleman wishes to change his altered reality, there will be an audience for it in this house. On the emissions trading scheme, we know that carbon prices are higher in the EU than the UK. There is a great concern among certain industries that if as has been mentioned in the press the government is planning to sign us up to the system, there will be a heavy price to pay particularly in ceramics.

Two weeks ago, we saw, OK, one moment. Fair enough. Two weeks ago we saw a ceramics factory in Stoke-on-Trent closed. Citing high energy prices under this Labour That is a continuation of the policies of his own government, actually. Which had four Industrial Strategy's all of which promised help for the ceramic sector which never materialised. But one of their biggest problems was making sure the contact regulations they have to supply with to sell their wares match the British system that we have here so what will he do to make sure the relationship we have will allow for the free trade arrangement

**** Possible New Speaker ****

for the goods we make and sell to Europe? It would be irrelevant if all businesses are shut down because of businesses are shut down because of high energy prices. He can talk about the previous government but it was his party that promised to cut fuel bills by £300 and instead they fuel bills by £300 and instead they continue going up. All of the market expectation is energy prices will continue arising under this continue arising under this government. That would be bad for other ceramics factories like the ones in his constituency.

There are a range of other things that we a range of other things that we could go into. There are going to be negotiations with the EU and there negotiations with the EU and there are plenty of things that we might raise. But we don't know if the government has raised them. government has raised them. Arrangements over illegal migration with France. Mutual recognition of with France. Mutual recognition of food standards. The certification of food standards. The certification of UK conformity on centres, touring musicians, and so on but the point musicians, and so on but the point is the government has not told us if it is pursuing these things.

Whether they are negotiating these things on our behalf. We on this side of the House are clear, Madam Deputy Speaker. We are clear. In following the referendum, following the referendum this country turned a page. It is very important that his party does not turn it back. The fact is that we are on the brink of witnessing yet another disastrous labour deal. Because we know that when Labour negotiates, Britain loses. To leave the House in no doubt, if and when my party is back in power, we will reverse any handover of power, any imposition of EU law, any new rights for the ECJ, and any new budgetary commitments.

Madam Deputy Speaker, it is my party that took the country out of the EU and it is my party that will keep it

**** Possible New Speaker ****

out and I commend this statement to the house. The question is as on the order paper. I called the Minister to
14:15
14:15
14:16
Nick Thomas-Symonds Portrait Rt Hon Nick Thomas-Symonds MP, The Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office (Torfaen, Labour)
-
-
is to follow the honourable gentleman across the dispatch box. gentleman across the dispatch box. Discussions are ongoing but I'm sure our members will understand that I our members will understand that I cannot pre-empt what will be revealed at the summit next week. We will not provide running commentary on negotiations and would not be expected to buy this House. After the summit has concluded, we will use the earliest possible opportunity, of course, to update members across Parliament on what has been delivered at the impact the measures will have.

I want to focus measures will have. I want to focus remarks on how the government is remarks on how the government is improving lives and making the UK safer, more secure, more prosperous. safer, more secure, more prosperous. I'm grateful to the Opposition for giving us the opportunity to talk about how the government is doing that. What we have heard from the that. What we have heard from the Opposition today and from the Leader of the Opposition lately is the only thing surrendered is the credibility of the Conservative Party as a party of opposition, not government.

The only Quantum Leap we have seen is a Conservative Party that has gone from government to irrelevance. 2025 started so well, didn't it? The Leader of the Opposition was turning over a new leaf, taking responsibility for mistakes, and said, "We are making announcements without proper plans and we announced we would leave the EU before we had a plan for growth." Today, with negotiations ongoing, they have gone back to the rehashed argument of the past. No analysis as to where interest lies in the mid- 2020s.

They do not believe in the ability of Britain to win and perhaps that is no surprise in the 40 years of failure that they delivered for the country. This government was elected in July 2024 with a mandate to deliver change for working people and we are delivering on the promises of the manifesto and if the right honourable gentleman does not know about the objectives, I suggest he reached the manifesto which delivered 411 Labour members of Parliament who overwhelmingly

**** Possible New Speaker ****

rejected the party opposite. And grateful to the honourable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And grateful to the honourable gentleman but I might point out that the motion stands by the results of the motion stands by the results of the 2016 referendum in terms of the amendment and the Labour amendment amendment and the Labour amendment does not say and so are they saying does not say and so are they saying the referendum result has been trumped by a one-term mandate? Does she respect the result?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

she respect the result? We respect the result and if you

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We respect the result and if you bother to read it, he was driving a red lines with regard to the single red lines with regard to the single market, customs union, freedom of movement. Delivering on the movement. Delivering on the promises... In a moment. It will unlock huge benefits for the UK, unlock huge benefits for the UK, reduce trade barriers, accelerate economic growth, keep us secure in an uncertain world - safer, more an uncertain world - safer, more secure, more prosperous.

That is what this government is working towards. Speak in the Labour manifesto which she has referred to several times, did it three anything at all about accepting dynamic alignment or rules? Anything at all?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The objective to negotiate, we must have agricultural products, must have agricultural products, food and drink, more cheaply treaded and the EU is in the manifesto and we have a mandate. What the government will do is put more money government will do is put more money in the pockets of working people and greater long-term stability and security for the British people. Apparently, the Opposition is Apparently, the Opposition is against that and so are Reform but, to be fair, the honourable member to be fair, the honourable member for Clacton says he thinks the current deal can be improved.

I am current deal can be improved. I am afraid that they never exactly told as far and we will wait to find out. Since last July, the government has been getting on with the job and resetting the relationship with the EU in a number of important areas. I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

will give way. Right now, the young people of the country cannot move freely across the continent. There are discussions about the youth mobility scheme. Will he commit to securing that for the young people of this country?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I would not say she is confined

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I would not say she is confined to any island, really. I have to any island, really. I have already spoken about smart youth mobility schemes which were agreed mobility schemes which were agreed upon by the previous government but the government is exercising diplomacy in the national interest and you only have to look at trade deals with the US, India, delivering deals with the US, India, delivering for the British people. Tell that to the workers at Jaguar Land Rover who the workers at Jaguar Land Rover who have had jobs saved by the trade deal announced with the US and on deal announced with the US and on the issue of the trade deal with India, I would say to the honourable India, I would say to the honourable gentleman from the SNP, I was in Scotland yesterday talking to the Scotland yesterday talking to the Scotch Whisky Association about the enormous benefits for Scotland of the India deal auntie should welcome the India deal auntie should welcome that, not criticise the government.

Britain is back on the world stage, no thanks to the Opposition and on that note, I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He mentioned Scotland yesterday and I am a Scottish MP and I'm in and I am a Scottish MP and I'm in Scotland every week and I have met with representatives from distilleries who are suffering because of the family farm taxi government has brought in and the government has brought in and the reason as farmers are downsizing. If the Minister and the government the Minister and the government proud of the legacy and contribution to the Scottish Whisky Association?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to the Scottish Whisky Association? I'm proud of the extra £25 billion we put into the NHS. The billion we put into the NHS. The Opposition are in favour of investment but will not tell us how they will raise the money. Is there they will raise the money. Is there any country that they actually want British business to trade with? They British business to trade with? They British business to trade with? They But, to be fair, they did not say which but they delivered nothing for the British people and if we secure it, they complain about that.

We secure an economic deal with the US and that was long promised by the last government, never delivered, do not like that. I like to be constructive so can I make a suggestion to the honourable member that perhaps he should become the Shadow Secretary Of State for No Business and No Trade because that is what we have negotiated. And whilst self-employed, and I would be careful, and whilst the Opposition continues to turn inwards or its, the government will focus on delivering.

Our priority is translating that strengthened relationship with the EU into a long-term UK-EU strategic partnership to improve the lives of working people and put more money in their pocket. I know the honourable gentleman has been trying to come in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

for a while so I will go to him. The honourable Minister will have

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The honourable Minister will have heard what the Opposition Shadow Minister said in terms of pride in Brexit and it seems to me the Opposition is proud of the terrible Opposition is proud of the terrible deal they delivered on Brexit and is unable to bring forward constructive unable to bring forward constructive ideas. They have set out five red lines but does the Minister agree the Opposition has nothing to be proud of about the Brexit deal they proud of about the Brexit deal they brought forward and nothing about brought forward and nothing about making Britain poorer or the trade deals and ability share the framework evil discussed moving forward?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

-- Framework he will discuss moving forward. Speak if you had bothered to speak to any businesses, they would know that the status quo they would know that the status quo is not working. I promised the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

honourable gentleman. the Minister has spoken about UK deals with the US and next Tuesday will be a UK reset with the EU. Can I ask, where is Northern Ireland's place in that? When we have asked about Northern Ireland getting about Northern Ireland getting benefit from the India, US trade

**** Possible New Speaker ****

deals, we have got no answers. I visited Belfast more than once

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I visited Belfast more than once as a minister and listen carefully to businesses about priorities. Northern Ireland has dual market Northern Ireland has dual market access and I would recommend they access and I would recommend they take the greatest advantage of that and there are a level of checks in the Irish Sea and so if we are the Irish Sea and so if we are unable to secure the deal, that will reduce the necessity for checks in reduce the necessity for checks in the Irish Sea and I hope you would support that.

On safety, the Trade and Cooperation Agreement left a gap in our ability to tackle crime and criminality and stopped opportunities to work together with opportunities to work together with European countries to stop the pose on migration. We are responding to a on migration. We are responding to a once in a generation moment for the collective security of our country collective security of our country for an ambitious UK-EU relationship and with the shadow of the 80th anniversary of VE Day and the powerful reminders we have seen up and down the country, securing this experiment.

Comes to NATO, this is a reminder of the contribution of the great post-war Labour government of Clement Attlee and Ernest Bevan and it remains our commitment, 75 years after the treaty was signed, and after the treaty was signed, and that will not change. In fact, a new Defence and Security Budget strengthens security and NATO and to suggest otherwise is irresponsible. The UK is rapidly increasing Defence spending and has played a leadership role on Ukraine and the only person who would benefit from division across Europe is Vladimir Putin.

On growth, the government's central growth, the government's central mission, we want to slash red tape.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable member for giving way. I'm pleased he's trying to negotiate a new SDR and work to to negotiate a new SDR and work to remove the tape. Does he agree that remove the tape. Does he agree that constituents like mine are desperate to remove that redtape to increase

**** Possible New Speaker ****

exports like they did before the botched Brexit deal? She is absolutely right.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

She is absolutely right. Businesses up and down the country will benefit. I will give way. Speak will benefit. I will give way. Speak the honourable gentleman is making a good case. Would you agree that good case. Would you agree that these deals do not diminish complement NATO at a time when transatlantic security cannot be taken for granted and securing taken for granted and securing access to programs like the Security Action for Europe will increase capability?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He is right. This would be the worst moment to start fragmenting Defence across Europe. Let me just Defence across Europe. Let me just say that on the three pillars of this negotiation, safety, security, growth, this government will deliver for the country's future, reducing the cost of living and creating jobs. Frankly, today's Opposition motion is stuck in the past. Everybody else has moved on and frankly it is time for them to move

**** Possible New Speaker ****

on, too. He raises the important point of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He raises the important point of the cost of living. Given the dire economic impact of Brexit including economic impact of Brexit including food, inflation being eight times higher than it would have been, and the cost of leaving the European the cost of leaving the European Union amounting to £1 million an Union amounting to £1 million an hour according to data from ONS, does he agree it makes sense to use does he agree it makes sense to use the summit next week to start discussions on the process of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

rejoining? I respect the result of the 2016

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I respect the result of the 2016 referendum. Exactly what she is saying in terms of the cost of food is what an agreement on agricultural products, food and drink would seek to deal with and I hope to see her party support that. Can I say to the party opposite that the defenders of party opposite that the defenders of the current status quo is what they seem to be and if they bothered to speak to traders they would know speak to traders they would know that the status quo is not working and not in the interest of UK businesses, big or small.

As one member said, the existing trade deal is, "Not a very good." That was the honourable member for Clacton. I do not often agree with him. As a result of the failure of the previous government, companies have endured significant delays at our borders and have had to fill out hundreds of pieces of paper to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The Minister is making an excellent speech. I'm sure he is concerned about small businesses who would particularly benefit from an would particularly benefit from an agri-food deal. Will he talk about benefits for small businesses?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

benefits for small businesses? It would be of particular benefit to small and medium-sized is that simply have not had the capacity to deal with the additional red tape we deal with the additional red tape we have seen in recent years. I will give way once more.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

give way once more. Last time we exchanged comments in the chamber, I will come back to in the chamber, I will come back to that in a bit but the honourable gentleman makes sensible points about trusted traders and easing about trusted traders and easing barriers at the border. But he knows when he speaks of safety and security that there are key security relationships with America, Canada, Australia and of course we cooperate but any changes to our relationships about security with Europe would be about security with Europe would be .

In particular when we talk about defence and procurement, because those Euro enthusiasts on the continent have always wanted a pan European army and pan- European security.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Just to say first of all there is absolutely no compromise on the core principles of our defence we have had since NATO was founded in 1949. Far from any weak link, this produces the opposite. This would be produces the opposite. This would be the worst moment to fragment European defence. That is not what this government is doing. I this government is doing. I dismissed any suggestion of a European army in the way I think the right honourable gentleman means it.

This is about a crucial moment for the continent. It is about leadership and peace on our leadership and peace on our continent. It is about strengthening continent. It is about strengthening and complementing NATO. Not weakening it in any sense. I hope people take that reassurance. I go people take that reassurance. I go back to the point about businesses. Businesses themselves are speaking out. Businesses have been upfront out. Businesses have been upfront about the challenges. Paperwork can about the challenges. Paperwork can take hours to complete and demands take hours to complete and demands detailed as niche as the Latin name for the chicken used in our chicken tikka masala.

It is not just M and S. All supermarkets have said the same as recently reported in the financial Times. Yesterday in Edinburgh, I heard from businesses about the difficulties they face, difficulties we could resolve with some ruthless pragmatism and a better deal. Meanwhile a few weeks ago, I will make some progress, more than 50 energy companies and organisations highlighted the need for closer energy cooperation with the EU, to drive down cost and drive the EU, to drive down cost and drive up investment.

All these were voices a Conservative Party of the past might have listened to but not it seems this lot on the front bench. There is an opportunity in front of us that the opposition does not even want to try to understand. It will make a difference in growing the economy. Boosting living standards. Eradicating the barriers to trade which limit trade with our single biggest trading partner today. I will just make a bit more progress. The consequence of the conservative position today is they are defending a status quo that is failing businesses and failing working people.

Their view and let's be clear about this, their view is the trade barriers holding businesses back should stay in place. It impacts the cost of living. It impacts the number of jobs. I will give way to the honourable gentleman.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the Minister for giving way. Does he agree that at the heart way. Does he agree that at the heart of this debate is this and is taking proactive engagement with our nearest and largest trading and security partner, which is a quantum security partner, which is a quantum leap from the failed positions of sneering resentment from the party opposite?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

opposite? Absolutely right. It is a quantum leap of improvement from what we saw from the party opposite. I give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

from the party opposite. I give way. I thank the Minister for giving way. The SPS and the energy deals he way. The SPS and the energy deals he has outlined, will this be on the basis of a mutual recognition of standards? Or does he envisage the standards? Or does he envisage the United Kingdom accepting EU standards now being dynamically aligned and placing ourselves under the jurisdiction of the European Court?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Court? Just to be clear, on the issue of energy, the issue of whether it is SPS or employment rights, this government is interested in a race to the top and not a race to the bottom. They feign interest in the details of the deal next Monday. The Leader of the Opposition did not even want to look at it before she went out over the weekend to try to make up her mind about it. That is not the behaviour of a serious opposition party, let alone a party of government.

They are very happy to carp on about what they are against. Not caring about reducing bills, about the paychecks of people, not caring about jobs and forever trying not to spell out an alternative. They haven't listened and haven't learned. On the issue of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

learning and listening, I give way. I just wanted to check on

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I just wanted to check on

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I just wanted to check on something. We can debate whether or not a trade deal can be improved. I am sure all trade deals can be improved. The American one or an extensive one with Europe. Probably extensive one with Europe. Probably the greatest one being negotiated. One area I think to go back into One area I think to go back into this discussion, it is really very clear. Looking at a paper produced by the Centre for European reform make this point very clearly as the government goes into negotiation, they say the Labour Party red lines do not extend to ruling out dynamic do not extend to ruling out dynamic alignment or a role for the ECJ.

Are they correct in the fact that is the position of the present Labour

**** Possible New Speaker ****

government? I had to say that having been for some years in this House with the honourable gentleman, I never honourable gentleman, I never thought I would find him quoting the Centre for European reform in a Parliamentary debate. Clearly there is someone on the other side moving on even if the front bench are not. Madam Deputy Speaker, driven by our ruthlessly pragmatic approach, next Monday's UK-EU Summit will be the first of annual summit between the UK and the EU.

It will be a day of delivery. Delivering on our manifesto, not returning to the customs union, single market or freedom of movement or revisiting

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the arguments of 2016. On the subject of the argument of 2016, I give way. I can understand why he did not

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I can understand why he did not want to answer the two questions from the opposing party on dynamic alignment. But surely given 1/3 opportunity he will commit this government not to in any way have government not to in any way have any dynamic alignment, so of course we can benefit from trade deals around the world and that is a great

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Brexit benefit. In the last few weeks we are

**** Possible New Speaker ****

In the last few weeks we are absolutely benefiting from trade absolutely benefiting from trade deals around the world. Hang on, nothing that we are doing with the European Union is stopping that. If European Union is stopping that. If you would like evidence of that, he can see the UK-India trade deal the government agreed in recent weeks. government agreed in recent weeks. Look at the deal with the United States that this government has agreed in recent weeks. Nothing we are doing with the European Union are doing with the European Union cut across this.

Our position has been we will not choose between our allies. The UK national interest lies in, there is nothing dynamic lies in, there is nothing dynamic about the party opposite, and we are deepening our trade relationship with all our partners and that is in our national interest. I had to say, and I have given away a number of times now, trade, security, defence and other areas of our relationship should never be treated as a zero- sum game. It is possible to deliver on all fronts and that is exactly what this government is doing.

So I look forward to turning a page next week. As we forge a new strategic partnership with our European friends. Making Brexit work in the interest of the British people. We are stepping up and meeting the moment. Making people safer, more secure and delivering growth. Delivering in our national interest which is what this government will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

do. The original question was as on the Order Paper, since when the Order Paper, since when amendment a has been proposed as on the paper. The question is the original word stand part of the question and I call Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

spokesperson. Thank you. My thanks to the Conservative front bench for bringing this motion, which reveals if nothing else the sorry state of
14:41
James MacCleary Portrait James MacCleary MP (Lewes, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
if nothing else the sorry state of their party. Not a vision for Britain's future but a stubborn fixation on a failed past. The botched Brexit deal has left us not flourishing but floundering. Not prosperous but poor. The dreadful Brexit deal has been ruinous for our economy. While they cling to Brexit dogma, British businesses, farmers and fishers across every corner of the country face the harsh reality of their record of incompetence. Britain deserves more than hollow promises and endless excuses.

Britain deserves better. The motion today is a checklist of conservative failures. What was once a pro- business party of open markets and free trade is now cowering behind trade barriers. There is only one Liberal Party speaking up for British business in this House and Businesses that were promised a bonfire of regulation are now buried in paperwork. The Tories did not

**** Possible New Speaker ****

deliver the streamlined trade promise. They created a bureaucratic nightmare. I am grateful to my honourable friend for giving me the opportunity friend for giving me the opportunity to speak on behalf of one of my constituents, who started a business importing organic produce from the EU. They have to pay to recertify EU. They have to pay to recertify the produce in the UK at their own the produce in the UK at their own cost, killing the business. Is this the type of red tape introduced by Brexit that the Minister should remove?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

remove? Absolutely. It speaks to the nature of the deal that was agreed when we left the European Union, far from creating the streamlined trade the Conservatives promised and instead they strangled great. Farmers were promised golden Farmers were promised golden opportunities and ended up poorer and weighed down by more Tory Brexit

**** Possible New Speaker ****

bureaucracy. I thank my honourable friend. The previous Conservative government undermined farmers and the rural economy by botched trade deals with economy by botched trade deals with Australia and and the former DEFRA secretary slammed it by saying the UK gave away far too much for far too little. Does my honourable friend agree that this government should not allow farmers to be should not allow farmers to be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

thrown under the bus again? I thank my honourable friend. She is a strong advocate for farmers in her constituency and across the country and I agree with what she country and I agree with what she said. Likewise the fishing communities have also suffered. In my constituency, I hear from my constituency, I hear from fishermen in New Haven who fear their livelihoods are close to collapse. Elsewhere we have the collapse. Elsewhere we have the example of offshore shellfish in Brixham represented by my honourable friend the Member for South Devon.

Every shipment of muscles they need a vet to sign 17 documents by hand. a vet to sign 17 documents by hand. 17. Missing a deadline at Calais and the whole cat goes to waste. That is not taking back control. That is not taking back control. That is losing the plot. The Tories have thoroughly botched our relationship with Europe but labour's with Europe but labour's Risks, I will give when amendment, Risks, I will give when amendment, risks cementing the failure.

We acknowledge their recognition the Brexit deal was not working but their approach falls short. Where Britain need bold leadership, they at times offer little more than a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

reluctant half measures. Where we need decisive action, there are excuses and red lines. He raises a very interesting point about shellfish. The day we point about shellfish. The day we left the EU, the environmental left the EU, the environmental standards and hygiene standards we apply to shellfish remained exactly the same as they were when we were the same as they were when we were in the EU. It is the EU that has applied all that bureaucracy and requirement. Under trade organisation rules, if you have equivalent standards, you are equivalent standards, you are obliged to allow goods to enter your obliged to allow goods to enter your jurisdiction are unchecked.

Why does the EU breach this international law the EU breach this international law so wantonly? Why has the government become a supplicant to the EU to try to gain favour with them so they remove these legal barriers?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable member. I think he would acknowledge it is not think he would acknowledge it is not just the regulations which are barriers to export in this country. I mentioned Calais. The Port of Dover sees massive delays in getting any goods through the port because of the additional bureaucracy and security which had to be put in place by Brexit. My port in New Haven which I know very well and I would humbly suggest they have had to spend billions of pounds to simply put in place more barriers to move goods through the port and that is what is slowing things down.

He makes a fair point about equivalence. At the end of the day it is not the only output of Brexit which is harming the industry. If I might make a bit of progress. So back to where we were. Labour's half measures I was talking about, they at the moment seem afraid of their reform -shaped shadow that it rules out bold measures to set British business free and stimulate growth. It cannot afford timidity. Businesses cannot afford it. Our young people who face a future with less opportunities than their parents absolutely cannot afford it.

parents absolutely cannot afford it.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I assume he is not advocating for the Common Fisheries Policy which has a ludicrous equivalent and effectively is bad for fish as they effectively is bad for fish as they were discarded live and bad for fishermen who were limited by quotas. It had a devastating effect on the fishing industry across the on the fishing industry across the country. Surely he does not want

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that? Absolutely not, the Common Fisheries Policy did a lot of damage

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Fisheries Policy did a lot of damage as did the agricultural policy due to farming. It is possibly worth noting the honourable member for Clacton attended only one Fisheries attended only one Fisheries Committee meeting a potential 42 he could have attended and never spoke up for British interests and that might be why the policy was not to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

our benefit. What we have advocated for around all of these areas is a new relationship fishing and it does not resolve this and they cannot cope with the idea that we can move forward to have a different arrangement. We don't go back to what we did before. First, the fundamental research and rebuilding trust damaged by years of recklessness and I acknowledge the work the ministers have done in this regard. Rejoining crucial European agencies that directly benefit people such as Erasmus+, the European Aviation Safety Agency and the issue with the Conservatives agreeing to pay £2 billion a year to rejoin the program after the enormous harm and had done to research and innovation.

They recognise the necessity of such programs and to turn around and with the government paying for other schemes, this is the very height of , British businesses must have the oxygen that they desperately need and finally, in terms of single market membership, prospective businesses, and the maximum opportunity for future relationships. relationships.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable member for a giving way. And I thank him and I welcome the comments he made about the Common Fisheries Policy. Will he join us and go one further and urged the government not to give up any common fishing rights the UK benefits from two giveaway fishing benefits from two giveaway fishing to France for other benefits? Can he to France for other benefits? Can he be strong and urge the government to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

make this more efficient? That can be rolled out definitively. I am clear, but we definitively. I am clear, but we should not be doing, it has been hysterically speculated in the right-wing press, we should not right-wing press, we should not trade away fishing rights for a trade away fishing rights for a defence deal. That is something that the Liberal Democrats have been cleared about and we will continue

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to be. Of course. The member is making some excellent points and to his credit excellent points and to his credit he set out four clear points and this is more than the government or main opposition party have done and a democracy fails to be a democracy people do not have the ability to change their mind. Does he rule out ever rejoining the EU?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable member for Arbroath for the point. It is impossible to rule out anything. If you would have asked me 20 years ago FI would have considered it possible FI would have considered it possible we believe, I would have said I thought it was extremely unlikely thought it was extremely unlikely and so who knows what will happen in the future. We may have a different government of a different complexion that chooses to take the steps but right now that is not something we are talking about.

On the other side are talking about. On the other side of things the EU must be flexible to, the UK is not an ordinary country but a major economy and the country but a major economy and the EU must make space for bespoke, pragmatic arrangements and the pragmatic arrangements and the government must immediately introduce a youth mobility scheme. Young people deserve the same European opportunities previous generations including those on these benches enjoyed. The Tories have refused this commonsense approach and Labour have flip-flopped.

We have existing schemes with Australia, the US, Canada, but not our closest neighbours. Young people deserve opportunities in Europe. In terms of the economic recklessness of Trump and the situation in Ukraine, we must have strong partnerships and a comprehensive UK-EU Defence pack is essential for national security. We have lost access to crucial intelligence sharing and vital mechanisms to track terrorists across borders. It's not taking back control but making British people feel less safe and secure and those who claim the cooperation is to do with -- would somehow weaken NATO, that's not the case.

This would increase the ability to deploy forces, particularly in the East, and I was to purchase more equipment more efficiently and to boost British Defence firms. Stronger cooperation on European defence bolsters the alliance and improved shared operational authority. The Conservatives are undermining British security and spreading scaremongering by suggesting otherwise. The UK could be plunged into a trade war with Trump. They to the £6 billion -- £336 billion was the UK trade with Europe last year.

Imagine how much more money the UK would have in their pocket if the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

disaster still had not shrunk the economy by 4%. In my constituency, many workers

**** Possible New Speaker ****

In my constituency, many workers tell me they are worried about the future of the plant and the principal reason they are worried is principal reason they are worried is the Conservatives have had so much red tape that in terms of the network, it is under threat. This is one example of the ways in which this particular Brexit deal damages the economy rather than support the economy rather than support score industries - does he agree? Speak I thank my honourable friend Speak I thank my honourable friend for the intervention and sticking up for local businesses as he always does absolutely, the effect on the supply chain in particular has been supply chain in particular has been an element not always obvious but detrimental to many, particularly larger businesses.

By contrast, the larger businesses. By contrast, the trade deal which was much vaunted signed with India as a fraction of signed with India as a fraction of the former deal with the EU, around 20 times smaller than the economic boost we would gain simply by aligning with the EU on goods and services. services.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The whole House will have noted he failed to rule out a second referendum because he did not like the result of the first one. Can I ask him directly, like the government, are the Liberal Democrats prepared to accept a process of dynamic alignment where process of dynamic alignment where we effectively become a passive intake from the European Union?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

intake from the European Union? There are two points and the first was about a second referendum first was about a second referendum and I find this to be fascinating. Elections happen every four years and at the last election we returned a Labour government and by the argument there was a referendum in 2016 in perpetuity, no matter what the British people think, this suggests that everybody should join suggests that everybody should join the Labour Party because we have a government in perpetuity and perhaps government in perpetuity and perhaps the members on this site might want to consider.

The second point, he used the term 'rule taker', and I find this fascinating because it was quite visible with conservative negotiations on Brexit, how enthralled they became to the enthralled they became to the At the idea you could have your cake and eat it and the recent trade deal does involve the UK having to take some things as well and that is what a trade deal looks like and it certainly looks like that when you are talking with the largest trading bloc on the planet.

The key question that the honourable member should be asking is what benefit would it bring to British people. Ultimately, that is the job of any government or politician - what will benefit us? By contrast, if I might resume, my honourable friend tells me of an engineering firm in his constituency which, due to Brexit redtape, finds it easier to trade with South Korea than Europe. Not just damaging, absurd. The one thing the government will not do which is guaranteed to deliver growth as negotiator bespoke customs union with the EU but they are hiking national insurance for businesses, stifling investment and refusing to support the most vulnerable in society by not scrapping the cap or safeguarding PIP.

Only a customs union can give businesses the long-term certainty they need our help to shield the British job from the looming threat of Trump's trade wars.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He told us he has a constituent that finds it easier to trade with that finds it easier to trade with South Korea than the EU. What does South Korea than the EU. What does that tell us about the EU? Is that whatever the reasons why people whatever the reasons why people voted to leave. It is because of excessive bureaucracy and it is excessive bureaucracy and it is protectionism. Why is it easier to trade with South Korea than the EU if it was not for EU bureaucracy? To if it was not for EU bureaucracy? To be clear, it was one of my be clear, it was one of my constituents, one of my honourable friend as much as it was but it is as simple as that, protectionist as simple as that, protectionist party putting up trade barriers and the Conservative Party continue to advocate for it.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

advocate for it. I thank my honourable friend forgivingly. My constituents are facing delays on essential facing delays on essential medication conditions like diabetes, ADHD, mental health. Does my honourable friend agree that now is not the time to play politics and be must seek an agreement with the European Medicines Agency to cut the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

red tape? It is an important point and there have been shortages of there have been shortages of medication which have had detrimental impacts on the lives of detrimental impacts on the lives of parents and children. Insulin and other essential medication. Britain other essential medication. Britain belongs at the heart of Europe, not belongs at the heart of Europe, not the periphery, isolated. We recognise rebuilding the ties requires patience and skilled diplomacy but, unlike the Tories, we will not bury our heads in the sand will not bury our heads in the sand I will not think like Labour.

We I will not think like Labour. We believe in the potential of Britain and the future of Britain and we believe that our future is brighter, believe that our future is brighter, stronger, more prosperous when we work together with you. Today, the Conservative motion offers no Conservative motion offers no solutions, only distraction from the disastrous record with the EU. disastrous record with the EU. Britain deserves civil rebuild relationships and deliver genuine relationships and deliver genuine prosperity and restore the standing with the world.

This is the Britain Liberal Democrats offer, not the Tories, their fantasies, and not Labour sitting on the fence with a clear vision and an unwavering commitment to the best interests of Britain. Let's be honest, many on the Labour benches agree and they know that the fence sitting will not cut but are not allowed to agree. Fear not, we will. The Conservatives have nothing to say on Europe. Labour have tied themselves up in red lines and the public now the future of the country is European.

For businesses, jobs, national security, children's future, it is the time to put the division of the past behind us and actively national interest. We will vote against the nonsensical motion and stand ready to work constructively with the government to build a closer and more pragmatic relationship with more pragmatic relationship with

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Ben Coleman.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It may come as a surprise to many people, finding things as a result people, finding things as a result of the mess left by the last government to be a little gloomy and challenging so today, I am challenging so today, I am incredibly heartened because we have got a real opportunity to be hopeful got a real opportunity to be hopeful and positive about the future of this country. The ideology and the chaos that has caused so much damage chaos that has caused so much damage from the Conservative government running scared from the Reform Party, is giving way to something pragmatic and competent.

I would pragmatic and competent. I would love to congratulate the government at this stage on its tremendous securing of trade deals with India and the USA, and I am looking and the USA, and I am looking forward to having a hat-trick, a trade deal with the European Union is even bigger and better than either of those and all in the either of those and all in the Because what is absolutely clear to me and what everybody knows the Labour Party, it runs through everything the party and the Prime Minister has said, this country has to get growth.

After the last 14 years in which services have been decimated, every time we open a cupboard as a new government, we find it bare. We have to rebuild public services. The swiftest way of us getting the economy and the growth that we need is by having a good trade deal with the European Union. There is nothing that will guarantee swifter growth for the economy. I give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Why have growth projections been halved since Labour has come in? What is his analysis of why growth projections have been halved since Labour came in?
15:02
Ben Coleman Portrait Ben Coleman MP (Chelsea and Fulham, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Labour came in? Do you know, I find it very hard to hear anything that the to hear anything that the Conservatives opposite are saying and take it with any degree of seriousness. What is their explanation of why after 14 years we have public services on their knees, a collapsing economy and even a frontbench spokesperson who says there was growth since leaving the European Union, despite Brexit. So despite Brexit, even your own side admits it was a disaster.

Nothing will deliver the growth of this country needs faster than signing a good deal with the European Union. Slashing red tape, and reducing regulation with the biggest market on our doorstep, opening up markets, kickstarting growth, boosting export and investment, reducing prices at home, this is a price that anyone who is not a crazy ideologist would welcome. And we on this side of the House are not crazy ideologist. The actions we took, and the actions the last government took when in government, businesses in my constituency want us to sign the deal with the European Union.

In my constituency they do not want us to rejoin. I am not talking about rejoining. They would like us to still be in. They think the damage it has done them, the imports must be about £160 for everything my constituent brings in but they do not want to spend the next five

**** Possible New Speaker ****

years re-negotiating the deal. He is making an excellent speech.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He is making an excellent speech. Of small and medium-sized businesses, they are crying out for this Labour government to come forward and renegotiate a good trade deal to ensure that those businesses can flourish so does he agree that can flourish so does he agree that this government is taking the right pragmatic approach in terms of wanting to deliver growth for our

**** Possible New Speaker ****

country? I'm grateful to my honourable friend for stressing that point. She friend for stressing that point. She is of course right. We have a government which has replaced chaos and ideology with coolheaded, pragmatic determination. We have a pragmatic determination. We have a trade deal with India, a trade deal trade deal with India, a trade deal with the US and we are going to get a good deal with Europe. This is why it is a day for reducing and not the it is a day for reducing and not the doom and gloom.

-- Rejoicing. I am doom and gloom. -- Rejoicing. I am sorry, I am very pleased and I think this is a coolheaded and commonsense approach and we are going to reset our relationship and put Britain First in putting Britain First also means putting our young people first so I am excited by the opportunity of the young people in my constituency and everybody's constituency to have the opportunity for time-limited control database youth experience schemes as we already have with dozens of other

**** Possible New Speaker ****

countries. I give way. He will know that there are thousands of young people, perhaps not in Chelsea but certainly in most of the country who are not in education, employment or training and that number has actually grown. Why should those young people desperately seeking access to desperately seeking access to education or jobs have to compete with large numbers of people from abroad? Is that what the people of Chelsea really one for people living in the rest of Britain?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in the rest of Britain? They don't want a Prime Minister,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

They don't want a Prime Minister, like the last one, who said we would level up to help people across the country and then did nothing about country and then did nothing about this. They want a Prime Minister who is going to invest in increasing skills and apprenticeships right skills and apprenticeships right across the country. That is what we need and that is what we are getting

**** Possible New Speaker ****

now. So on that point, because rhetoric is important, does the rhetoric is important, does the member agree with Lord Dubs, or does

**** Possible New Speaker ****

he agree with the alternative for Germany leader? I have to say that when you come to Lord Dubs, you have...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Answer the question. Continue. When the honourable member mentions Lord's dubs, it touches a mentions Lord's dubs, it touches a soft spot with me. He is a great and a doughty campaigner. Lord Dobbs a doughty campaigner. Lord Dobbs will have his views. I was talking about the Prime Minister setting out an absolute commitment to increase an absolute commitment to increase the skills of young people right across the country. That is in no way undermined by the prospect of a way undermined by the prospect of a controlled Visa based youth experience scheme.

In time such as experience scheme. In time such as we have at the moment, which are very unstable, it is also right that very unstable, it is also right that we should be seeking a closer relationship with the European Union that will strengthen defence and security, alongside our commitment security, alongside our commitment to NATO. Also an agreement which I to NATO. Also an agreement which I am hopeful the government will pull off, and as honourable friends of mine have raised, will bring new jobs in the defence industries of this country.

We are facing the most stark and serious defence challenge we have faced in decades and we have to meet it together with the European Union. I'm sure having spoken to many ambassadors, I know they are welcoming Britain playing a full role in defending our shared continent. That is what we are doing as a government and that is why it is disappointing with the prospects ahead of us to hear the Conservative party and the Reform Party putting ideology first, still putting ideology first, ahead of growth, head of security.

They are failing to say what they would do instead. They just want to continue with the status quo, the status quo where we talked about the chaos in Kent where trucks are backed up for miles near Dover because of the customs checks, never ready and checks rotting in the queue under the Conservative government. Jeopardising car manufacturing in Birmingham, a region that relies on timely chains and it was hit with rising costs, delayed parts, thanks to the Conservatives. Selling out communities by moving out of European structural funds and replacing it with a Shared Prosperity Fund worth a lot less.

That was a failed Conservative That was a failed Conservative They weakened Port Talbot in Wales in the steel industry and made export harder and reduced competitiveness in already a challenging global market. That was the Conservative Brexit and the undermined Scottish farmers and distillers by erecting barriers to their biggest export market. This is the record that the party opposite is delighted to defend. I would not be delighted to defend it but they are. So much though they have brought this ridiculous motion here today but I am delighted by the amendment the Labour Party has put down and the government has put down.

This is a contrast with our pragmatic, coolheaded approach and it could not be more stark with these ideologues. I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He has emphasised the opposition but at least they have turned up to give them their dues. The architects give them their dues. The architects of Brexit will usually be sitting here. None of them are here today so here. None of them are here today so does that not show the contempt with which they hold us and the voters as well?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

well? I agree with the honourable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I agree with the honourable member that if your entire system for getting elected is you are anti-EU and you think you can defend the interests of the British people better by continuing with the chaotic system that we have and that is your reason for existence, I do is your reason for existence, I do not think it is OK for not one of the members to ask a couple of questions and as for the honourable member for Clacton, I do not know where he is today but he really ought to be here.

So in conclusion, it is refreshing and I think we should be cheering. It is refreshing. Let's look at next week refreshing. Let's look at next week and be a bit more optimistic. Let's not say we are always going to be outdated by the French and the Germans. We are perfectly capable as we have shown in trade deals with India and the US, we can get the best for the British people and that is what the people of this country voted for in the last election.

Ending failed ideology. Applied common sense. Coolheaded and determined and as a result, at the end of the meeting next week, and in future years, the British people will benefit and we should all be delighted about that.
15:11
Bernard Jenkin Portrait Sir Bernard Jenkin MP (Harwich and North Essex, Conservative)
-
-
Madam Deputy Speaker, I am delighted to follow the honourable gentleman for Chelsea and Fulham in his flowery optimism for the future of this country that somehow we are realigning ourselves with the European Union without actually joining and that is a terribly good thing. It just makes me wonder about all the debates that I have attended over 33 years in this House about our relationship with what used to be called the common market and then was called the European Community and then was called the European Union.

This debate has a ring of familiarity about it. There are two sides in this House that tend to completely misunderstand each other. Only I think that on this site we now understand the truth because the truth came out in the referendum. What the referendum demonstrated was the House of Commons was completely out of alignment with the population on the question of our membership of the European Union. The whole Brexit story was about a battle within this House as to whether the pro-EU majority was going to assert itself and somehow negate the referendum, or whether the referendum itself would be respected.

That is why I think my right honourable friend the Leader of the Opposition and her shadow Cabinet colleagues were absolutely right to put at the front of this motion the importance of honouring the referendum result. The fact is that a referendum result represents a superior mandate to a single term of election for an elected government. Because that referendum takes place on a single issue and I don't think anyone would pretend that the European union was the main issue at the last general election.

Therefore for anyone in the government or indeed any Liberal Democrat to try to use the general election result as a mandate to circumvent the result of the 2016 referendum is playing a very dangerous political game. We don't have a written constitution. I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Of course this was reversed, for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Of course this was reversed, for 40 years. We were told of course to his point that a referendum was superior to continuous elections. We made the point after the referendum. made the point after the referendum. That was a generational move. It is hardly generational after the few

**** Possible New Speaker ****

number of years we have had since. I think the important point is we don't have a written constitution and I agree with my honourable and I agree with my honourable friend. But we do have in our mind a friend. But we do have in our mind a hierarchy of legitimacy. On which in the end the credibility of this house, the democratic credibility of house, the democratic credibility of this House depends. The fact is as I was saying, a referendum represents a superior mandate on a single a superior mandate on a single issue.

With a great struggle, the issue. With a great struggle, the pro-EU majority eventually aligned itself with the decision the British people had taken on our membership of the European Union. I give way. of the European Union. I give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am extremely grateful. In the area of political ideas, is it not the point that the democratic legitimacy in this place is on the basis of popular consent? There is basis of popular consent? There is no more direct expression of consent than in a referendum, which is why this result has to be honoured.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

this result has to be honoured. I agree. That is why I thought it

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I agree. That is why I thought it was an ominous portent that the Minister from the despatch box refused to answer my right refused to answer my right honourable friend on the question of honourable friend on the question of whether there would be alignment or subjection to the European Court of subjection to the European Court of Justice. If the referendum was about one thing it was about taking back control of our laws. In fact there control of our laws.

In fact there were many of us in the League campaign at the time who argued the campaign at the time who argued the British people to understand sovereignty and certainly by the end of the referendum, they understood of the referendum, they understood sovereignty. Getting into a permanent alignment of regulation or subjecting the meaning of laws applied in the United Kingdom to the scrutiny and jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice giving back control. That is a very dangerous thing for a government that was elected on the principle of honouring the referendum result and is now playing dog whistle politics with immigration.

For that government to be backsliding in secret behind a sort of, a sleight of hand into allowing the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice and permanent alignment back into our law is a very dangerous thing for the government to be doing and pretending it is not happening, which is exactly what the Minister did at the despatch box. I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He will well remember that during the referendum there was a booklet circulated to every house that circulated to every house that famously said, "This is your decision and the government will do decision and the government will do what you resolve." The people what you resolve." The people elected to leave and we spent three years in this place trying to get through. It is no surprise that through. It is no surprise that today the government and the Minister have three times blatantly refused to answer a straight question about whether they will concede dynamic alignment at the concede dynamic alignment at the summit.

Is that not the type of duplicitous behaviour that made the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

duplicitous behaviour that made the public so angry in the first place? There is another dangerous game

**** Possible New Speaker ****

There is another dangerous game being played by the Liberal Democrats. My right honourable friend pressed him on further there friend pressed him on further there would be another referendum. He did not say that there would be. The idea that you have a referendum to leave the EU but did not require another one to rejoin it would be absolutely incredible politics for this country. Why do people become disillusioned with politicians? They seem to agree to a proposition and then do something different to four day agree to.

There should be no possibility of rejoining the EU, dynamic alignment, are accepting this except in limited areas where

**** Possible New Speaker ****

it will expire without a further referendum. You talk about people losing

**** Possible New Speaker ****

You talk about people losing trust in politics. Would you agree, trust in politics. Would you agree, with the honourable member agree that the promise of £350 million a that the promise of £350 million a week for the NHS which was broadcast week for the NHS which was broadcast on the side of a bus during the referendum might have reduced trust in your party? Happy to point out that since we left, we are spending that since we left, we are spending more than £350 million more on the NHS than we were before and contributions to the EU have fallen dramatically and much faster than dramatically and much faster than what was expected.

The benefit, the what was expected. The benefit, the said of the bus has turned out to be correct, although I personally believe it was statistical sleight believe it was statistical sleight of hand to use that number and I said that at the time. I have no doubt that if we are going to get drawn back in, we will have to start begging the NHS to make these payments again and I do not think that is what people voted for. This great fund, which I think will be borrowed, we're going to have to borrow some of that fund as well because it was going to be borrowed through some mechanism through the European Central Bank, or will it be taxed? If it is all government borrowing, to be active it by participating in borrowing for that fund or would it be better to remain aloof from it to concentrate on spending money on our own Defence? The point that was made in terms of the money that we have committed to Defence over the years, it is far greater than the vast majority of greater than the vast majority of other EU countries since the end of the Cold War and remanded our nuclear deterrent to the protection of the whole of Europe and we play our part and the idea that you can deploy troops more quickly with free movement of people, what planet are Liberal Democrats on? It is ludicrous.

Coming back to the ludicrous. Coming back to the Defence fund, there have been big Defence funds in Europe before about the game every country plays is what they put in, they get out. The French are past masters because they will participate in the programme but if they do not get the lions share, they will pull out when that was meant to be part of the deal because they were not getting enough work out of it. The idea that this is a freebie for British Defence companies to get extra money into the indices, that is not going to happen.

In any case, this is a fund that is not about creating more fighting capability this year or next year, which is what we need, but this is about the long-term programs that the Defence industry once. This will not rescue us from the absence of America from NATO if it occurs for more than a few months or years under Trump and let's not remember that Trump will not be there forever but has 45 months to run so let's not do more damage to NATO by making it look that we will take care of our own security.

This is a very dangerous thing. I remember Madeline Albright, a Democrat Secretary of State rallying against what was then the European defence policy because she warned it defence policy because she warned it represented the three Ds, the discrimination against non-EU members like Norway and Starcy and the decoupling of America and European defence policy. Is that what this House once? Labour says NATO is the cornerstone of defence. What signal are they sending to Donald Trump by suggesting that we would have an EU defence policy which excludes the US? What signal

**** Possible New Speaker ****

does that send? Exactly the wrong signal. I am pleased he has raised this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am pleased he has raised this point and the real point is GD vans point and the real point is GD vans came over here, the vice President, and ripped a hole through the Europeans for excluding ourselves. Europeans for excluding ourselves. -- JD Vance. Each time, you get the -- JD Vance. Each time, you get the sense that they are keen to sense that they are keen to decouple. Isn't what we are going to do is giving strength to the do is giving strength to the argument that we do not need them any longer and they have to look elsewhere? That is the danger.

NATO is making sure the US never goes is making sure the US never goes into isolationism again.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

into isolationism again. That promise of creating an EU Defence capability has been on the Defence capability has been on the table since the declaration in 1999 when Defence in the aftermath of the Maastricht Treaty, when France and the UK, and the Labour government, declared the EU would have autonomous military capability which is separable but not separate from NATO. We still have this issue where the armed forces in EU countries are allocated to NATO tasks but at the same time they are ready for EU tasks on this had to be a very complicated deconstruction arrangement to try and make sure that the Defence mission does not conflict with NATO and we finished conflict with NATO and we finished up with something called the Purlin -- Beryl and Plus arrangement which Turkiye has not accepted.

There's always an impasse and is necessary because there is a political headquarters and it is an international organisation contributing, and one of the most successful in the role, by the way. Why is the EU trying to duplicate it for itself? It is more interested in statecraft and state building than defending our own continent and the anger with which Ursula von der Leyen and her cohort have attacked Trump and the anti-American sentiment which has always been there, which we can do without at the moment.

the moment.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Is highlighting that the EU,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Is highlighting that the EU, which sees itself as supranational, and NATO, which is not, and that tension lies at the heart of the tension lies at the heart of the statement EU has to make and so it statement EU has to make and so it is now evident and sadly, I do not know if the government is careless, but they are either complicit or but they are either complicit or ignorant. I wonder which.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

ignorant. I wonder which. Sadly, what they have always done is promise more than they deliver is promise more than they deliver and it was meant to galvanise European states and its failed and European states and its failed and did not do that and when there was serious military operation required, it was NATO. There are some operations taking place and on a operations taking place and on a limited scale and if you ask me, the limited scale and if you ask me, the British and Americans need to talk about this now because the Europeans are not contributing enough and are not capable of doing so.

Even if this time there was going to be a this time there was going to be a rapid growth in EU military capability to address the crisis that we now face, it would take decades to replicate this. We are talking about tactical nuclear weapons, aircraft. Why does the EU need to have its own air defence policy? That is what NATO does. It does European air defence. We need to bolster NATO. It's encouraging, to bolster NATO.

It's encouraging, Peacekeeping force in Ukraine is all being done at NATO, not the EU Crisis Management Centre headquarters, whatever it is called, because NATO has the capacity to plan the large-scale military activity. The honourable gentleman

**** Possible New Speaker ****

shaking his head. What does he know about it? Does the honourable gentleman not

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Does the honourable gentleman not see the fragility of European Defence which is dependent on key Defence which is dependent on key items of American hardware? He items of American hardware? He correctly identifies we do not have that now and he correctly identifies that now and he correctly identifies we have to look at how to operate, trade, integrate the systems. Does he not see the fragility of Defence if President Trump or another incoming US leader says, because Actually, you are on your own.

We do not care about Defence."

**** Possible New Speaker ****

not care about Defence." Adamant members that when I am in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Adamant members that when I am in the chair, interventions will be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

shorter. Does he not think it would be the best thing to say that we will not build our own Defence capability in the EU but strengthen NATO and the argument that the EU has to strengthen NATO, I do not think that is the ambition of the bureaucrats in Brussels. They have got a flag and a pole and they wanted European army, that is what they talk about where particularly the Germans and French. They want a European army and that would send the wrong signal to President Trump.

We need to develop those capabilities but develop those capabilities but

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Is a right honourable gentleman's point put beyond all doubt, with the point put beyond all doubt, with the wording of article 2 of the UK-EU, which says the purpose of cooperation is to arrive at, defence. Isn't it therefore defence. Isn't it therefore perfectly clear that the EU is perfectly clear that the EU is setting itself up for its own sovereign defence capability?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

sovereign defence capability? The European defence agency and all the mechanisms that have been created, well, the European defence created, well, the European defence agency is an European Ministry of Defence, that is what it is supposed Defence, that is what it is supposed to do. But suppose in the ideal world they live in, the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats, that this Defence Committee comes about. The fundamental problem that I have is the European Union was never originally conceived as a defence originally conceived as a defence and foreign policy organisation.

There are many countries in it with very, very... It was functionalism that drove the foundation of the European Community is, and it was about trade. It was about creating a single market. Defence was never in the minds of the early founders of the European Union, and it is very ill suited for this task. Because the institutions were not designed for this purpose. It is not in the culture of these institutions. And to rely on situations for your defence and security is an extremely unwise thing to do.

Unlike NATO, which is very well suited for this task. Already. And does not need to be duplicated. But to put it mildly, the political disunity in the European Union, particularly towards Trump, that inflict NATO as well, but it is not an instant solution to the political problems that exist in a NATO, if that is what the European Union is seeking to resolve. So I think we should dispense with the idea that making a defence pact with the European Union is somehow communal, the great panacea for all the problems we are facing in our continent because of President Putin, on the contrary, I think it is likely to make things more complicated, make them more bureaucratic, and may make our defence into his less competitive, because they will be cocooned inside this fund.

Instead of fitting in the global stage. And incidentally, our defence procurement cooperation with the Americans remains absolutely essential, they have the lion's share of the technology, way ahead of the European Union when it comes to technology. Why is the government to technology. Why is the government then using this, I think they have already been religiously committed to this idea that the defence is introduced in the first place, in the declaration. But why are they so devoted to doing this now? Because it is what the European Union really wants.

We have a supplement in these negotiations, we are asking them, this is the one thing that would make them feel good, to draw the United Kingdom into the defence arena of the European Union. And meanwhile, what concessions are begetting from the EU? I don't see any. It will be very interesting to find out. I don't think they're going to instantly reduce all the trade barriers because we are not in the single market, we are not going to be in the single market, they are still applying for checks, the antiquated wet stamps apply to forms, certified the fitness of shellfish, stamps and so last century, still using wet stamps on custom forms, that is how backward they are.

When there are electronic frontiers between African countries, when there are no barriers incidentally, cutting the answer to the problem for some so, I fully support the opposition's proposals, which is the question, to question everything that the EU is going to demand others, which the government will simply see. And to tear off those agreements if they are not in the national interest. And the government has no monopoly on national interest, we know the national interest is actually a subjective term.

The national interest in the mind of one person may be different to the national interest in the mind of another person. Far as I am concerned, we left the European Union in the national interest because we wanted to remain sovereign democracy, in charge of our own laws. And to be like, well, most other countries, which are not in the European Union, which are not in the European Union, and they are fine. They get on fine. And as my right honourable friend on the front bench pointed out, the economy is still growing, or was going until the government hit it with their budget.

We have every opportunity. One of the reasons we left the European Union, sorry to really to get all these arguments, but we left the slow growth, high Tax trade block, so we could make deals with the high growth, low regulation, high employment parts of the world, which in the end are going to provide us formal business with the EU then we get from the EU. Actually, the majority of our trade is outside the EU. The vast majority of our trade, and particularly our services trade, is outside the EU, people forget that.

And by being obsessed with trade with the EU, we actually drive our economy into a actually drive our economy into a straitjacket, which we are well out of it. So, I think the government should take away from this debate a warning. They know they are being attacked by Reform, Reform voters who will probably never vote Conservative or are less likely to vote Conservative in vote Labour, but they are going to Reform, because they sense the backsliding going on in this government.

And if there was ever to be another referendum, I would hazard a guess that it would be against rejoining the European Union. So, there can be no rejoining by stealth. Which seems to be the government's policy. And we will stand by the British people, and we will dishonour any agreement the government makes with the European Union that is not in our interests, and indeed, there are parts of the withdrawal agreement that we may need to visit, with the Northern Ireland Protocol, where the technology has moved on and we can move to a frontier free trade frontier across the...

Barrier free, electronic frontier across the North and South border, without the need for checks on trade between the United Kingdom, between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom. One of the founding principles of the act of Union was there should be frontier free trade within the United Kingdom as a whole. And if the continuing development of the Northern Ireland Protocol continues to impose those checks, then those checks are not in the national interest and we should reserve the right to jettison the protocol and replace it with something better.
15:39
Tom Hayes Portrait Tom Hayes MP (Bournemouth East, Labour)
-
-
Thank you for the opportunity to Thank you for the opportunity to speak, can I commend the honourable member of nearly half an hour of staying on his feet, that is quite an impressive feat. It is an honour an impressive feat. It is an honour to follow the honourable member who has been elected, who was elected 33 years ago, when I was aged nine. And years ago, when I was aged nine. And over the last 33 years, I imagine he has seen a lot of history, I imagine he has seen a lot of history over he has seen a lot of history over the last 10 years, nearly 10 years, since the referendum.

And thinking about what some of those main about what some of those main features of that history are, I think it is indisputable that we live in a new world. We have the illegal invasion of Ukraine, Taiwan as a test point, we have NATO and as a test point, we have NATO and the UN at risk. We have authoritarian populism rising, and risking democratic backsliding, be it with the undermining of institutions, concentration of power institutions, concentration of power in executives, dismissal of checks and balances, growing electrical interference, big tech captains who are involving themselves in democratic politics like never democratic politics like never before.

It is economic inequality on unprecedented scale, risking democratic instability, here and around the world, with wealth concentration, tax haven networks unaddressed, social inequality rising, people feeling left out, questions of development, and debt relief gone from our political discussions. It is the rise of technology risking democratic threats. AI and social media creating potential for deep fakes, ultimate information, cyber attacks, lethal systems without human oversight, it is the question of health challenges like the global pandemic we have gone through, it is the question of climate change which continues to go on unabated, unaddressed on the scale needed, creating the possibility of resource conflicts, climate and stresses on our wildlife.

The reason I say this is these are the major threats emerged in the last 10 years. It is not an exhaustive list. If we carried on, I think you would want me to sit down faster. But we have to face reality, all of us in this place were elected to behave like grown-ups, to face the facts, to debate on the basis of reality, and to come up with commonsense solutions. When we face these kind of threats, again, I was not even talking about the lions share of these threats in the UK, I would say is the result of an inheritance from the last government, it is no wonder that people outside the walls of Westminster feel like we go to slow.

That we don't focus on the things people actually care about. It is no wonder people are succumbing to hopelessness, that people feel like politics is not meeting their needs. So, the question was put earlier, what was on the ballot paper? I accept that the European Union was not on the ballot paper as an existential question. But what was on the ballot paper was the quality of life in our country. The state of our economy. The possibility of generations that have been locked out of our democratic agreement and our social contract from having a chance at life.

And what we are saying on these benches is that trade is a solution to some of those challenges. As I was saying, people outside the walls of this palace feel frustrated by the slowness of our debates in here. I will come to you shortly. And so, we have to recognise the importance of urgency. That is why I am genuinely extremely pleased that we have a government which has moved forward in recent days in recent weeks, with two significant trade deals. The first, with India.

Achieved within 10 months, after eight years of the Conservative saying they would get a deal. We got a deal which would put more money into people's pockets, create jobs here, and would benefit our economy. The trade deal with the United States. It is not the trade deal we could have got, had Kamala Harris been elected president. It is the trade deal we have got with Donald Trump elected president. And I think it shows realistic commonsense negotiation. I will come to you.

It shows realistic commonsense negotiation to put money into people's pockets, to grow our economy, and to create jobs. And now, we have the prospect of 1/3 potential danger -- Trade deal on the horizon, that is crucial because if we don't actually foster the conditions of trade in the world of global insecurity, we are going to create further problems in our democracy here and around the world. I think Sir John...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order. You twice, not Sir John. This is a very long established convention that we do not refer to right honourable and honourable colleagues by name.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

colleagues by name. I am extremely grateful to my

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am extremely grateful to my namesake for giving way. He is making an interesting speech, and he making an interesting speech, and he is right about how global power, and its growth, is making people feel they cannot affect decision-making. they cannot affect decision-making. I think that is a profound point. But the point about that is, you need to route power closer to need to route power closer to people, not to detach it from them. In the way that occurs when you give In the way that occurs when you give overpower to foreign potentates whether they be in any part of the whether they be in any part of the world or the EU.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

world or the EU. Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker, and I think the honourable member for his intervention. I agree with for his intervention. I agree with him, which is why as a sovereign independent trading nation, we in this place are able to shape the this place are able to shape the debate and conditions of trade, so I agree with him on that point. And with that prospect of the EU trade deal in front of us, we have to grasp it because if we do not, we will see our country fell further behind.

And I think here, there are some areas of possibility for that trade deal. If we think about energy, we have the need for the transfer and trader clean energy between France and the European Union on a larger scale. I had the privilege of visiting Gosport recently, to see Ivy to come and see the connector that can exchange in clean energy between UK and France, showing we can keep the lights on here but also in France, and across the European Union. Surely, energy security is an important feature of our democracy, in an age where we having threatened by Putin and other

**** Possible New Speaker ****

dictators. I give way. He talks about us being a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He talks about us being a sovereign nation being able to choose our trade deals. I assume from that point, we will get a vote in this place on the shape of future trade deal with the United States, so that we are able to examine it and have a vote, and exercise our

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and have a vote, and exercise our parliamentary serenity. -- Sovereignty. I thank the honourable member for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the honourable member for listening to some of what I said, which is me saying that here in this place we have the right to speak in place we have the right to speak in debates such as this, the shape the conditions of trade and clearly, with the Minister on the frontbench listening acutely to what he says and everybody else says, that message is being carried into government, the government minister is nodding profusely, in which case, we have the democratic we have the democratic accountability.

Thumbs up. We now move on to the other areas of potential EU-UK relationship potential EU-UK relationship improvement. And defence is obviously a core part of that. NATO obviously a core part of that. NATO was the cornerstone of our collective security, but we must also recognise that a strong UK must sit alongside strong European sit alongside strong European countries. With the UK raising its defence spending, to an unprecedented level, and with our efforts to grow our defence into bays, we obviously need to do that, for our own security and security of democracies, but to set an example to European countries about raising our own defence spending working our own defence spending working All of us in this house will have small businesses that will come to surgeries, who will tell us about the redtape they encounter as a result of the Brexit deal.

They voted for something very different, and I think we can all recognise that because if we don't, we are staring our constituents in the face may come to our surgeries and they tell us their truth very clearly. By reducing red tape, we can help to grow jobs in our economy, can open up orders to new trade and smooth our export which is critical if we want to grow our economy because without growth in the economy, we will not raise living standards.

We will not be able to be a leading

**** Possible New Speaker ****

democracies. I appreciate the member giving way. As the member agree with me way. As the member agree with me that we are joining a customs union to achieve all of those aims of producing redtape?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the member for that intervention I do not agree with him on that. We are talking about a different proposal, one which is different proposal, one which is meeting the needs of our constituents. In the interest of allowing more members to speak in allowing more members to speak in this debate, I will take no more interventions. After 30 minutes of speaking, I think he said everything speaking, I think he said everything he needed to say, and if he didn't, we have a serious problem in this we have a serious problem in this house.

On that question of expanding opportunities within the UK relationship, I am particularly relationship, I am particularly struck by the need for a controlled, balanced youth mobility scheme. Around our country in my constituency, we have young people who are suffering generational challenges that their predecessors did not face. Beer their inability to buy an affordable home, their inability to have secure work, their inability to get the education that they want, the fact they have gone through a cost-of-living crisis and a pandemic, surely we are to our younger generation to provide them with some of the conditions that will allow for a better life and a youth mobility scaled is important to that.

I have in my constituency significantly number of schools. I visited for a roundtable that was hosted by them and joined by other language schools. They have talked to me about the difficult financial circumstances they are all in as a result of the Brexit deal that was negotiated. They have talked to me about the difficulty keeping the doors open because of the damaging Brexit deal, so surely we can put money back into our English-language sector, and this is critical.

We are living in an insecure world. Britain soft power is so critical to ensuring that we are respected around the world by bringing people to the UK before they go home. They get a sense of how wonderful, how open, how accepting we are as a country to take back to their families, back to their home countries in order for them to grow an affection for this country, come back repeatedly, spend money here and grow our tourism sector. PCP have the highest concentration of English-language schools in any borough or local authority in the UK.

It contributes £400 million to the BCP economy. Initial anger schools contribute £44 billion nationally. Imagine how much better we could be if we had a youth mobility scheme and support for our endless language skills. I want to conclude so that more people can speak in this debate by talking about not just the importance of the UK reset as a way of delivering trade in its own right between the UK and the EU, but the benefits of trade. In a protectionist world, we need to be talking up the benefits of trade.

Trade pangs people into closer and more harmonious and profitable relations with one another. It brings down the walls and the barriers between nations. It makes war less likely because it binds people in peace. It doesn't just put money into people's pockets or create jobs in the communities, grows economy is faster and it raises people's living standards. Trade has challenges but done well, trade deals can help to make sure that our countries prosper because at the heart of it, the reset should be about trade, about our economy, and it should be about our businesses.

It should not be a question of identity, culture slow and scaremongering. It should be about grown-ups in this chamber gathering together, talking about what is important to constituents on the basis of the fact rather than rehashing tired debates, scaremongering, and we need to face the future and I am pleased that we have a government who is finally

**** Possible New Speaker ****

facing the future. It is good to follow the honourable gentleman reminds me of
15:52
Iain Duncan Smith Portrait Rt Hon Sir Iain Duncan Smith MP (Chingford and Woodford Green, Conservative)
-
-
honourable gentleman reminds me of how young he was when we first came here. I hope that he stays here as long, or maybe I don't. Can I say that today's debate is important because what I want to get to, and I have been inventions already, but I want to get to what the government gets out of this negotiation, and it has been tepid on these key issues. The reality is that accept is the governments negotiation in India finishing off a trade arrangement deal and I welcome the idea that they have been able to begin to negotiate with the United States.

We wouldn't have got a trade deal because they rejected it for four years. Biden said there would be no trade deal with the UK. I make the point, let's not observe because it is not giving us a trade deal. I have my problems with the president president Biden did not want trade with us, simple as that, and it was a mistake on his part. The trader was pretty much all done and it was binned. So the fact that we are able to do these trade deals which represent that part of the economy in our exports which is larger than the European Union, the rest of the world, and the more we do from those, 73 trade deals after Brexit with the UK government, and I stand ready to congratulate the Labour government if they use that to get more trade arrangements.

That is what we are here for. I might want to press the more to get more out of the US but that is another debate. I don't disagree that the deal that we did with Europe is not able to be improved. I think they put up many barriers in the course of this, and weaponised Northern Ireland. That was a grave error on their part and they risked some of that process of peace in Northern Ireland by making it a critical negotiating tool that could leveraged the rest of the negotiations.

We have been left with the problem in Northern Ireland and I encourage the government to have a good look at that. I did not vote for the Windsor agreement because I thought it did not solve the problem by any long chalk at all and has left them in the same position a in before with a couple of modifications. So this is really about getting to the issue here. I just want to say that the European Union cannot play straight.

The fact is that our standards here in animal welfare and product health are above those of the European Union and they always have been. The EU knows this, so the reality that we had to be going through all these particular checks and changes and they are desperately keen to get alignment now because that makes it a rule- based order coming from them is what they have always wanted to do. The truth is, they don't have that arrangement with other countries around the world.

You take New Zealand. They are quite happy to have New Zealand check their products before departure and they going through Rotterdam without any checks other than the fact that they came from that area. They know what they have to authorise and they do it. I sat down with a group of people to have that long discussion when negotiations had woken down in Parliament. I very much remember that we talked about trusting each other with regulations and working with that trust to get an arrangement that made it as easy as possible to get across the border.

He accepted that in this discussion. Providing we could trust each other, we wouldn't need to have the rules as they are proposing the moment. It was only later when my government came back and did shimmy with him and he thought he had it all so he took it, but the reality was that they knew all along that it was easier to do this then they made out, so I have always felt it has been a peculiar objection of theirs because they can sort it out very quickly.

Our standards are higher and quite capable of checking different producers to say whether or not they fit within European standards. Are they up to European standards? Very simple. That can be done in every trade deal and they already do it in other countries which have been part of the European Union. So the idea that get this sorted we would have to go into alignment to accept their rules over our products which will make it more difficult to do future trade agreements, if we are all takers from the European Union and cannot negotiate these areas ourselves.

It brings me back to the point that I made. Before I come to that, the trouble is that the argument I heard was that sanitary arrangement, an agreement which would involve alignment will address the price of food and is literally absurd, patently absurd. If checks concern the price of food, we could unilaterally relax. They don't have to be where they are. That is our decision to take. It wouldn't change all lower the price of food. If anything, it is more likely as a result of that to block us from doing a number of things.

All these things put at risk when it comes to arrangements, and where we would want to be in terms of developed farming in this particular country. And before I do, I want to make a couple of points before I give way. The point about this is that we have known, and everybody outside around the world knows that the EU puts up the world knows that the EU puts up very hidden barriers. It finds all those little regulations and problems that they link in with their products with their goods, and that has happened for a long time.

It was even happening when we were in the EU. We are by nature a free- trade country and there was no way on earth that the EU is a construct has free trading they want to protect their markets rather than

**** Possible New Speaker ****

open up the rest of the world. I would like to thank the gentleman for giving way. Welsh Food & Drink exports have fallen by 18% & Drink exports have fallen by 18% since 2018, so doesn't that evidence the evidence that has been done by these deals?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I said earlier on that these are about protection in the European about protection in the European Union. Their trade hasn't fallen away on that. They didn't setup those barriers in the first place, those barriers in the first place, so my argument is that the European Union wants it all. That is the Union wants it all. That is the reality. They want it all and negotiated in bad faith from the word go. We have an agreement. I word go. We have an agreement.

I think it is a pretty good agreement as trade agreements go. It is one of as trade agreements go. It is one of the largest that we have but it can always be improved. I don't disagree always be improved. I don't disagree with that. The reality is that you need to deal with an organisation that is as relaxed about being fair to you as you are to them. That has to you as you are to them. That has Simply ask the honourable gentleman that we have debated and discussed and agreed with each other many times, I laud him for his stance on Russia and everything else, no question at all about that.

But I just want to return to this little document I came across for the Centre for European Reform, in fact, it is complement Rita Seo read things I don't agree with, I do tend to do that a lot, it is a bad habit, I know. But I want to say to him, here is a little quote from this document. This document is very close to how the European Union heads of departments all think. It says labour's red lines do not extend to ruling out dynamic alignment, or a role for the ECJ, in dispute settlement.

So, I asking the simple question. Are they correct? Does the government's red lines rule out dynamic alignment or do they not? And I would give way to him right now, because I am generous like that. I would give way to him because he probably wants to come and answer that question. I tempt him to come to the Dispatch Box, do the government's red lines, and will they, and could they, agreed to dynamic alignment and ECJ rules? I will give way to him now because I see he is beginning to move.

He is not, what a pity. No, with respect to the honourable gentleman, he has got a bit wild to go before he heads up to that Dispatch Box. I am after the government, not him, but we will get to that in due course. The reality therefore is that they do, no denial. It means essentially, the government is going to go to this Well that they will give way and dynamic alignment. That is exactly what the EU wants, that is it. My worry on all of this is we know what is going on.

I'm just moving on to something else, then I want to sit down and give others a chance to speak. The reality and worried about most of all, is the way in which in bad faith, when we talked about improvements, to be fair to the government, they did to the European Union. What difference do almost immediately, when we talked -- What did France do almost immediately, when we talked, to be fair, showing some leadership over Ukraine and trying to galvanise others together, that is his role, the role is to haul America and keep it to us, that is what he has been doing.

But when he got involved in how Europe should he got involved in how Europe should form a coalition of the willing, and how he wanted to drive that further forward and get some kind of agreement on it, what did France say immediately? France just said no, before you give us access to the fishing. That is it. In what world did fishing have anything to do with defence? And yet, they were a nice, to block off -- They recognise fishing comedy block of the UK in I think a generous position, to say they want to galvanise to do more.

The problem is Europe spins collectively, if we take out the countries that have joined since the Ukraine wall, Europe, across-the- board, spends half in dollar terms of what the US does on defence, half, we have more people in Europe. And we have more industry. And yet, we spend half of what America does on weaponry and defence. That is a shocking position to be in, if you are member of NATO, if we have not stood up, we have done better but still not good enough.

The rest of Europe has been shocking in terms of what it has been done. By the way, we don't get any discussions unless we have fishing on the agenda, I have to say it has been one of the worst spenders on defence in the European Union, let alone global. Way less than others less than the others. At the bottom of the scale for some so, I simply say to the government, he is right to press on defence to get the European nations to step up, but as my honourable friend said earlier on, we have a mechanism for that.

He is right to do it through NATO. We must not allow Europe to slide away from NATO, as their defence. Because if we do that, and I watched, as many of the leaders, like price -- Vice president Vance, went to Europe and shock the European Union leaders, as it was meant to do, quite vindictively I thought, fair enough. But what I found with all of this, which is now where we are heading, somehow to encourage them peculiarly to form some kind of European Union defence organisation, is exactly what will give the American administration the permission to say well you can do this yourself.

We are already halfway there by the way, because we are forming a coalition of the willing, but America isn't willing. And we are towards with the United States over their relationship with Ukraine. We agreed about the ceasefire. But America has now changed its position, they are going to have negotiations before a ceasefire. I think, by the way, is wrong. I don't think you can do that. Personally, as a big supporter of America, I think they are mistaken on this point. But we put the whole of NATO at risk for a fishing deal.

In what world does anyone do that? In what world do we do that for? The answer is, because we are too desperate to Corrie favourites, it seems to me, with organisations that really, when push comes to shove, when it comes to defence, needs us more than we need them. The reason they need the UK looked into this is because we are the key of so much what they need to do for defence. And I say to the government, you have much stronger tools in your hand.

Much stronger tools than you may think for a minute. We have key persuasive powers and defence. We should not sell them on the basis that they should become European. And we should destroy NATO or damage NATO, simply because we want to do some kind of adjustment or improvement, which includes dynamic alignment and a loss of possibility of future trade negotiation.
16:07
16:08
16:08
Jake Richards Portrait Jake Richards MP (Rother Valley, Labour)
-
-
to litigate the Brexit debates from 2016. Back at that referendum, 66% of my cassette was voted to leave the European Union, there is scant the European Union, there is scant desire for us to rejoin and even less for a return to embrace freedom of movement, and I will always put my constituents first. These are red my constituents first. These are red lines that I understand, honour, and respect, but my constituents also see the changing world around us, see the changing world around us, and recognise the world has been transformed immeasurably since 2016.

In the terms in which we left the European Union do not match the European Union do not match the global moment we face today. President Trump's tariffs have rocked the international economic order. War has broken out in Europe. order. War has broken out in Europe. And there is a need for dramatically increased defence spending, and new methods of working with international colleagues. A new wave of mass migration for the Middle East and Africa, the small boat crisis for our channel, can only be properly handled with further cooperation with our international partners.

And ultimately, Madame Deputy Speaker, my constituents are patriotically they want their country to be resilient to new threats. And prosperous in a chaotic world. And while any future deals with the European Union must respect critical deadlines with patrolling borders, protecting ultimate sovereignty in Westminster, there is now scope for a new thread, a new relationship, to embolden our security and economic interests in a volatile world. Indeed, this new approach can, should and will, in my mind, overcome the increasingly desperate archaic old-fashioned attacks from some of the members opposite about the so-called Brexit betrayal.

And the British public know this. Polling by the good growth foundation shows 73% of the British public supports significant cooperation with the EU on trade, economy, defence and security, more than twice as many adults say the EU is the UK's most trustworthy ally. Rather than the United States under the current president. And around 60% of all the public say it is imperative that we have a closer deal with the European Union going forward. So, I knew better deal with the European Union is popular, because if you think the current relationship is working.

Many feel the execution of Brexit, while supporting the principle and voting in favour in 2016, but the execution during the chaotic Conservative premierships has been disastrous. And Madame Deputy Speaker, this public desire for change is a reality which the Conservative party cannot seem to wake up to. The Conservative has been a great party. A party I disagree with in principle and fundamentally, but at their best, the Conservatives have been successful, in modernising the country, in line with global trends. They brought us into Europe.

They were the party who played a pivotal role in building the single market, that so many Europeans enjoy today, and it is a sad sight, given this track record, that they seem to oppose the notion of negotiating a new better relationship with Europe. The party of Churchill and Thatcher, who once led on the world stage, now left to hawk from the sidelines, like radio commentators from a bygone era. And the Leader of the Opposition is busy denouncing every post Brexit deal this Labour government signed as inadequate or betrayal, including those that she herself failed to get over the line when she was trade secretary.

On this, as with so much of the Conservative's current fixations, the public have simply left them behind. They are fighting yesterday's battles. So, whilst the themes that have one such in the referendum, cannot be ignored for so any entanglement and political structures of the notion of increased immigration lack of control will rightly be left with outrage about those who supported Brexit, but those with the benefits of a closer deal are now clear. I am happy to give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am grateful to the honourable gentleman for his tribute to the Conservative party, it has indeed been a great party and remains there. On his fundamental point on entanglement, he makes a valid point about cooperation and collaboration, that has always been so. Of course. But the core here is authority entanglement means granting authority, to make power outside of this country. Surely this movement this country. Surely this movement of young people which is addressed up form of free movement is just

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that. I reject the characterisation of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I reject the characterisation of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I reject the characterisation of Out. I will come onto that specific policy in a moment in my speech but the characterisation of think is unfair. I remind the Conservative unfair. I remind the Conservative party, not in the habit of giving advice to the Conservative party but my understanding is that the last general election, amongst voters under the age of 35, the Conservative party finished fifth. Maybe looking in the mirror, think about how they ended up in apposition, might be a good worthy worthwhile way to spend some time.

The benefits of a closer deal and now clear. Unified carbon electricity market can raise billions in revenue for the Treasury, more collaboration and defence will ease the pressures and enhance capability and support joint procurement, there is also scope, this goes to the honourable member's point, for a UK-EU fob ability scheme to be part of this deal. But it has to be negotiated, the devil is in the detail, they should be tight limits in terms of numbers, and duration of stay, and it should be part of an agreement whereby the EU help the UK, and many of the challenges we face in the immigration, this doesn't stop at one moment, this doesn't stop at one deal, this is an ongoing relationship, and the position this government is taking is open, listening, getting the best deal for Britain, and one I support.

As so often is the case, Madame Deputy Speaker, the political class is always lagging behind public opinion and often fighting the last battle. The Brexit paragon that certainly defined British politics between 2016 and 2020 is now history. And the government is right to now be looking in pursuit of better dealerships with our European partners, to improve living standards and for economic protection, and ensure our country's security. I am pleased that this government appears to be willing to seize the moment.

And in the coming weeks, I look forward to supporting

**** Possible New Speaker ****

their efforts in that endeavour. I do not intend to put a time

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I do not intend to put a time limit on, but members will be aware there is in the region of 25 people left wishing to speak, so they might

**** Possible New Speaker ****

like to consider how long they are going to spend on their feet, so as many colleagues as possible can get in. Rachel Gilmour. Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. Last week, this house recognised the 80th anniversary of the Allied victory in Europe. So I find it somewhat strange that today, the party of Churchill, is calling for a debate that seeks to drive a wedge between us and our friends and allies on the continent. Madame allies on the continent. Madame Deputy Speaker. I speak on behalf of the young people, farmers, fishermen the young people, farmers, fishermen and small-business owners of my constituency. Yes, plural.

Hard- constituency. Yes, plural. Hard- working people who have felt the consequences of our severance from Europe. The bundling of the farming and fishing policy since Brexit has led to supply chain dysfunctions and small markets and financial small markets and financial uncertainty for our producers. Our farmers, once able to trade freely with Europe, now find themselves with Europe, now find themselves bogged down in paperwork, losing out to competitors, who enjoy smoother trade arrangements. Despite the trade arrangements. Despite the turbulence of Brexit, the European Union (Withdrawal) Act remains our Union (Withdrawal) Act remains our largest trading partner.

-- The European Union remains our largest European Union remains our largest trading partner for soffit seems in my mind to be a curious act of economic self-harm. Grand promises of scaling back of Brussels of scaling back of Brussels bureaucracy were made. And precisely the opposite has occurred. More red tape, delays and headaches for our tape, delays and headaches for our
16:16
Rachel Gilmour Portrait Rachel Gilmour MP (Tiverton and Minehead, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
As was put to the Lib Dems spokesperson, the red tape is coming from the EU, not us. Why is the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

higher never aimed at those responsible for introducing the trade barriers? I don't accept what she is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I don't accept what she is saying. Big corporations may be able saying. Big corporations may be able to adapt, shift operations and sidestep the chaos but for our small sidestep the chaos but for our small businesses, the backbone of our economy, it is not merely an economy, it is not merely an inconvenience but a catastrophe. I asked my constituent backer James asked my constituent backer James what she has made of the Brexit fallout having run a superb agency fallout having run a superb agency which folded.

As an MP representing which folded. As an MP representing many SMEs in my constituency, I hear daily about their struggles to keep daily about their struggles to keep trading. Conservative governments trading. Conservative governments fend for themselves in a post Brexit landscape riddled with landscape riddled with uncertainties. Talk about cutting off your nose despite your face. We must swerve the temptations of dogma and pursue policies that benefit our economy, our people and our future. Forming a new customs arrangement would need an impact and would be a sign of grown-up politics.

I am looking eagerly for the government's big recess in the weeks to come. Without a trading arrangement, it will be clear that reset just means rebrand. Fisheries have not fared any better. Standing motions of reclaiming British walkers turned out to be hollow as coastal communities have seen dwindling profits,, gated licensing and deals that have left them worse off than before. If only the honourable member had attended more than one of the 42 EU Parliamentary fishing committee meetings which he was paid to attend, maybe our fishermen would be on a more even keel.

We must embrace the EU mobility scheme. The Somerset sets 324th on the social index. And while there is no overnight result, they have access to opportunities on the continent which can only be a good thing. The youth mobility scheme was a new financial barrier that made travel and work abroad and option for the privileged. It would be the democratic travel. Empowering talented young people who may have skills but lack the financial means to save opportunities as their more affluent peers.

Why should this be reserved for a few? It is my firm belief that travel and broadening one's experiences can be one of the best forms of education. Why would we deny our young people the golden ticket to live, to work, to study, to build lifelong friendships in Europe? Indeed, this is not entirely an argument of economics. For what monetary value can be placed on broadening the horizons of our young people, whether those opportunities may lie. It is a peculiar irony that young people from other side of the world, the likes of Australia and Kiwi friends are part of the scheme while the UK across that small body of water known as the Channel remains on the outside looking in.

I'm going to and with the words, the I will give you a translation if you need one.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. As this is the debate in the name of his mad supposition, in the name of his mad supposition, I think it is only right that I share some personal reflections on the record of the party opposite the record of the party opposite when a in government. I'm feeling generous. I'm sure the house will be generous. I'm sure the house will be pleased to know that this will be a brief speech but I'm also feeling brief speech but I'm also feeling generous because I want to begin with three simple and constructive with three simple and constructive suggestions for the Conservative party on its future approach to the European Union.

Number one, a good European Union. Number one, a good place to start would be by accepting that the Brexit deal sign in 2020 has done substantial damage to our has done substantial damage to our economy. Fundamentally, it was the deal that put up barriers to trade. deal that put up barriers to trade. As the OBR has concluded, the UK government will be 4% smaller than government will be 4% smaller than previously expected. That means the country is on course to be £100 million poorer than it otherwise

**** Possible New Speaker ****

million poorer than it otherwise would have been. It is not the first time this figure has been referenced. Was based on the assumption that trade would fall and would be a hit to productivity. Trade has risen. The whole basis of that assumption is wrong. Will he please acknowledge that?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I have seen frontbenchers from the Conservative party talking up the OBR when it is convenient to them but on this case when they don't agree, they do cry and say
16:21
16:22
16:22
Andrew Lewin Portrait Andrew Lewin MP (Welwyn Hatfield, Labour)
-
-
made the country poorer and that it must be looked at again. Suggestion number two, my second tip would be to apologise to the peas this community. He is no longer a member community. He is no longer a member of this house, so perhaps it is time to fully disown the former member for Uxbridge and South Islip, and as for Uxbridge and South Islip, and as well as saying sorry for his language towards the business community, it might be time to say community, it might be time to say sorry to the 60% of companies that have told the British Chambers of commerce that it has become harder commerce that it has become harder for them to trade as a direct consequence of the deal signed.

The highlight of the speech and the highlight of the speech and the shadow minister was his reference to shadow minister was his reference to leap, and I think it is time to jump back in the present, and my advice is that the party opposite should is that the party opposite should listen to more pod casts. I know for a fact that the shadow chancellor and the former Chancellor do listen and the former Chancellor do listen to a certain weekly political pod cast featuring the former Chancellor George Osborne, and I know they listen to it because I've heard the voice notes they have submitted as questions in recent weeks and months.

I think it is an excellent pod cast but I fear that while Conservative MPs are tuning in, they are not really listening. Because George Osborne could not be more clear. The European Union is Alison guest biggest trading partner, and if we are serious, it is time for a new and more ambitious deal. On this, he and his co-host are united and they are absolutely right. I am a pro EU and internationalist. In my short time in this place, I have had the opportunity to speak at a greater level on other debates on why now the substantial reset in a relationship with our largest trade partner.

Today, I will not revisit those arguments at length, but we are less than a week away from the UK use summit and I am very hopeful that we will see a comprehensive deal that makes progress on security, trade, and a Visa-based youth mobility scheme. This is in 2016 or 2020, and while the Conservative party may want to replay the old debates, public opinion in this country has moved on. In an uncertain and volatile world, there is no more important relationship for the UK than the one with our closest neighbour and biggest trading partner.

People want to see progress. They want to see a deal that makes a material difference to their lives. And I am confident that is what this Labour government will deliver starting with the summit next week.
16:24
16:25
16:25
Joy Morrissey Portrait Joy Morrissey MP (Beaconsfield, Conservative)
-
-
Labour side who can't wait to bring us back into the EU but I would like to state that I am opposed to doing to state that I am opposed to doing so, not only because the British people voted the opposite way and we should honour the referendum, but should honour the referendum, but also, we negotiated a trade deal also, we negotiated a trade deal which is that from the benches opposite, the Labour Party has forgotten that we negotiated a trade forgotten that we negotiated a trade deal with Europe and what I am interested in is the invasive nature of what the Minister said from the of what the Minister said from the despatch boxes which committed us to nothing other than resetting our relationship with the EU which I relationship with the EU which I would like reassurances on what that means, what strategic partnership is being referred to.

What concessions being referred to. What concessions the Minister planning on making and is there some kind of new EU treaty renegotiation that will come out of this and what kind of active or this and what kind of active or passive role is the UK planning on being in this summit, because none of that has been made clear but from the Backbench Labour MPs, we have heard quite a lot about saying that we will have a wonder new trade deal, a great new Visa system for young people, and that gives me pause that we are not being told fully what is going to happen at the summit, or there is just such anticipation for backdoor EU realignment that the Labour Party cannot contain itself but tell us what they are planning on doing.

My biggest concern on all of this, and forgive me for wanting the reassurance from the despatch boxes, is that I would like a guarantee from the floor of the house that the outcome of the summit involves no concessions of jurisdiction, of the European justice, not the application of any of the principles of supremacy of EU law. No question of European justice brought back through the back door through EU realignment with EU law, I just want to be clear I want to hear reassurance that nothing is going to be discussed or renegotiated at the summit.

Because that would actually terror part all the work that we did through our withdrawal agreement, through the Retained EU Law Bill, and all the work we did to make sure that our laws had supremacy over the EU, and that was the point. Many of us voted for Brexit because we wanted to see our sovereignty restored. We wanted to see our borders restored, our laws brought back into sovereignty and making sure that we honour the commitments that we made over the retained EU law to move forward with the EU and I'm fine with trade deals all over the world.

I welcome that. I want us to be successful as we can be and I praise where praise is due. I am happy to praise the Labour Party if the Labour Party has a trade deal. I am happy to acknowledge that and say well done because I think we should be trying to get trade deals with any country that we possibly can but the reason why I'm asking for assurances from the despatch boxes as I have seen the Labour Party change their view on Brexit, on trump, on so many things, on scrapping winter fuel, on energy bills, so forgive me if needing reassurances and National Insurance, so forgive me for needing reassurance from the despatch boxes the Minister is not going to come back with some 1984 sort of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

doublespeak and expect us to enjoy that. Her scepticism is well-founded

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Her scepticism is well-founded because of course, many on the benches opposite, I don't say all, benches opposite, I don't say all, could barely sustain the result of the referendum. They regarded it the referendum. They regarded it with outrage. The people have spoken and contradicted the long-standing prejudice of the liberal prejudice of the liberal bourgeoisie. That is why they tried bourgeoisie. That is why they tried to block Brexit. The prime minister tried to block it 48 times, so she is right to be sceptical about the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

party opposite. Thank you. My friend makes an

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. My friend makes an honourable point and I think we need to protect our Brexit freedoms but make sure that we hold the Labour make sure that we hold the Labour Party to account. We were told from the member from Chelsea and Fulham, the member from Chelsea and Fulham, we had quite a lot about all the things that the member has planned for our free-trade deal and all these wonderful things, but I am concerned that we are going to rewrite history, we are going to ignore the British people again, we are going to allow for dynamic backdoor realignment with the EU, without giving Parliament to say, without giving the British people a say, and once again, you did have, the member did have a long say.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I very much appreciate her giving way, even though I took 1/3 of the time her college opposite to it, but can I understand possibly if you genuinely suggesting that we should genuinely suggesting that we should tell this house now what we will be negotiating in Brussels next week? We should give full details of the strategy away and maybe that's the sort of attitude the Conservative party took when it was doing the trade deal with Australia which led to the former secretary saying it was a poor deal which let the was a poor deal which let the farmers down.

If you take that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

farmers down. If you take that If a gentleman opposition allow

**** Possible New Speaker ****

If a gentleman opposition allow us to commit what we have committed the British people, a trade deal the British people, a trade deal already in place, the EU law in place, we have these negotiations in place, so unless there is going to be a new negotiation, what exactly be a new negotiation, what exactly is the purpose of the summit? We would like clarification and interestingly enough, I was going to stop but now I have been inspired by stop but now I have been inspired by the honourable gentleman opposite, the notion that the Labour Party talks about is nature -related.

NATO has nothing to do with the EU, it is a completed separate entity, and to talk about dynamic realignment with defence, that has come after the 2017, actually after we left the EU, and that has always been part of the plan of the European Union, to have an ever closer union through media and social policy, which is welcome if you are international, Lib Dem, or Labour, I'm sure you would love to have another way of binding this to the EU, but NATO as a separate entity, it has one document that has been agreed on since post-war, no I will not, since the post-war.

And that is something that gives us that alignment in military terms, which we need to protect Anne Foster. And one of the Lib Dem members mentioned about military capability, it isn't about that, it is about the cost of who bears the cost of our military capacity in defence of Europe, and in defence of the free world. And it was created post-war, in a time when we had the Cold War and we needed to have that strategic protection in Europe. And that has held true and is still holding true today.

So, why would we disrupt that, and why would we muddy the waters with this motion we muddy the waters with this motion that brings in NATO, which is a separate entity to the EU, to talk about something that has to do with the military, and bringing it into EU jurisdiction. I will finish, then allow others to make progress in this, because I would like to hear from my colleagues as well on all benches, because I think this is a very interesting debate. And thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker for your time, and thank you all.

You know, I am really going to enjoy hearing from the Minister, when they return from the summit and to hear what exactly they have in mind for us and the EU. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madame Deputy Speaker, I am

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madame Deputy Speaker, I am delighted to join this debate. I was really pleased to hear the Minister's earlier speech from the Minister's earlier speech from the Dispatch Box, saying that at the EU summit will be focusing on safety, security, and growth. And boy, don't we need growth? Having had 14 years we need growth? Having had 14 years of chaos and disaster with the party opposite. And since leaving the EU opposite. And since leaving the EU in 2020, businesses across the UK have had to fight the many barriers have had to fight the many barriers that resulted from the Tory's that resulted from the Tory's botched Brexit deal.

I've got to declare an interest, I'm a big fan declare an interest, I'm a big fan of the EU, that doesn't mean, like the member opposite just said, that I want to rejoin the EU, what it I want to rejoin the EU, what it does mean, we need to get a better trading deal for our farmers and businesses in bombardier. I'm a big fan, I was lucky enough when I was fan, I was lucky enough when I was at Middlesex Poly many years ago, to do the Erasmus scheme, go to Europe for two years, study in France, then French comedy my finals in French, and that cultural exchange, and that ability to go to another country is so important for our future, and our young people, and that was before I met my Catalan husband, so I have lots of family in Barcelona, and it is so important that we have those close ties with the European Union.

As a member of the UK-EU parliamentary partnership assembly, I was delighted earlier this year, that we were received with open arms in Brussels. Our trading relations with our nearest and largest partner are too important to be taken over by playground politics from the party opposite. I am so pleased that the New Labour government is seeking a more cooperative and mature relationship with the EU, and as one said, thank goodness the grown-ups are back in charge. Wales has a unique relationship with the EU.

Especially regarding our world famous and delicious and best famous and delicious and best tasting in the UK Welsh lamb. Farmers have told me, and what NFU Cumbria have told me, is we need a new deal for 723 alone, Wales exported £600 million worth of Food & Drink to the EU, and a large & Drink to the EU, and a large proportion of that was made. But UK exports to the EU overall were down 19% in 2023. I will give way.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

On the subject of lamb, will she,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

On the subject of lamb, will she, forgive me if I ask her to reflect forgive me if I ask her to reflect again, as I did with my honourable friend opposite, in the fact the previous government negotiated a previous government negotiated a trade deal with Australia, which the previous Conservative environment secretary described as a disaster secretary described as a disaster for farmers, not least for farming land., can remember that well, thank land., can remember that well, thank you for the intervention.

And we know the problems with reductions in export is mainly due to the increased paperwork form filling, checks and balances, and trade that checks and balances, and trade that there is. Some companies have simply given up. They have had such a difficult time, dealing with the red tape. They also have to put up tape. They also have to put up prices, which of course, has prices, which of course, has impacted consumers. So, for farmers, businesses and consumers, we need a strong beneficial agreement. And I am so pleased the Minister is working hard on this.

Our working hard on this. Our government's number one priority is economic growth and this will be supported by growing cooperation with the EU. Recently, I met businesses in my constituency, who exported the EU, to have a proper discussion about what Brexit has met
16:37
Catherine Fookes Portrait Catherine Fookes MP (Monmouthshire, Labour)
-
-
for them. And sadly I was unsurprised by what they had to say. unsurprised by what they had to say. I already mentioned the increase in admin that hit their productivity. They are doing more work for less They are doing more work for less reward. Requirement for product information, documentation, creating a time-consuming and costly burden. Once the paperwork is all done, Once the paperwork is all done, there is another set of challenges. One business I met said the delays at Calais were borderline unmanageable for them.

Is it unmanageable for them. Is it impacting the SMEs especially. One of the businesses I spoke to at the roundtable said the biggest issue currently is that inspections at Calais for our products are very slow, but at the same time, we are restricted in the time spent at the restricted in the time spent at the port due to dangerous goods that are included in the loads. This is about balance that is barely manageable balance that is barely manageable for us. Another company, what a disaster Brexit was for the business disaster Brexit was for the business export business that I run.

Although, through agreement, we are now back to zero tariff, the net result is simply a huge increase in admin, and transport costs for which ultimately consumer pays. One final example, from a company in my constituency. Exhibiting in the EU is much more complex and requires greater admin. For example, if you even take so much as a screwdriver to an exhibition now, the EU, you must fill in a form for that screwdriver, even though it is to be used to put your exhibition stand up.

Each bit of equipment must be accounted for, it must be counted in and counted out. So, overall, three strands emerged from my roundtable. We must remove trade barriers. We must have dynamic alignment standards. And I would really like to see, the businesses in my constituency, would like to see a return to some kind of youth exchange scheme that I managed to benefit from. But trade is one of the most pressing issues at hand as we seek to rebuild our relationship at the summit next week for staff removing barriers for export will be essential for farmers, businesses and consumers, as the government pushes its vital mission of the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

comic growth. Very grateful to Madame Deputy

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Very grateful to Madame Deputy Speaker. Just a few words about the context of the debate. And to reflect on some of the points being reflect on some of the points being made. It's clearly the case, and we are accused of this is if it is a negative, but the campaign for Brexit are those of us who supported
16:39
Danny Kruger Portrait Danny Kruger MP (East Wiltshire, Conservative)
-
-
Brexit are those of us who supported were doing so in a sort of nostalgic spirit, a backward -looking spirit, there is something in that, because we were about restoring British sovereignty, there was a sense something good was being lost and needed to be brought back. All good resolutions are, in a sense, backward looking. But revolutions are the progressive ones, good revolutions restore what was lost, and that is what Brexit was about. Nevertheless, despite that point, which I do concede, it is also the case, more fundamentally, the case for Brexit was forward-looking.

And it is about actually putting this country in the best possible position to meet the challenges of the 21st century. What the 21st- century demands is agility, it demands the independence that sovereignty can allow. Obviously, cooperation, obviously working closely in partnership, that Britain has always been an outward -looking country. But the nimbleness and agility that will be needed in this is very highly contested New World that we are in, that is what Brexit was about, and we have really seen, a number of hugely significant occasions and moments since Brexit, why our independence was so necessary.

We sought in our COVID response. We have seen it in the context of Ukraine and our defence policy, and we are seeing it now, we are seeing it since Brexit, in terms of arbitrators well. We have seen indeed in the relationships with the negotiations with the US, compared to the EU in the recent past. One trade, I made the point in an intervention earlier, this point, the challenge is often made that Brexit has harmed our GDP because of loss of productivity.

The reverse is the case. Trade with the EU has grown since Brexit, is not the case that we have suffered detriment because of that. Trade is growing between the UK and the whole world, including with the EU but it is growing over the non-EU countries, which makes the point about why it was so necessary to reclaim sovereignty over our trade policy. And I share the concerns raised by colleagues on this side of the House about what is being planned next week in terms of dynamic alignment of trade.

And I echo the call to the Minister to absolutely rule out the back door alignment with the arrangement of the EU. We are seem very worrying hints, so I look forward to his response. Madame Deputy Speaker, the case for Brexit Deputy Speaker, the case for Brexit , a very important matter of course. It really, fundamentally, that acknowledges we all do, really, people were voting to take back control of our borders and our laws. Those two vital questions remain contested. Because this government never believed in Brexit and didn't understand the call of the people for independence and sovereignty in those two key respects.

So, on borders, on immigration, recognise the case for a youth mobility scheme for in principle, the idea of reciprocal arrangement for young people being able to spend a few months or year working in another country. Obviously, recognise the abstract case for that, and is a good thing, the honourable lady spoke earlier said in her case, it was a nice thing to be able to do. What we talk about, when we see the value of these schemes is when there is a reciprocal arrangement, when copper bowl #coming and going, it is the same that applies to the arguments about the Indian trade deal.

And it's reciprocal arrangement on national insurance. The fact is, we are getting many more people coming to take advantage of these so-called arrangements, by coming to the UK, and coming to the KU, so it is not the case that would have A-level playing field. All we would have is another way, by which the arrangement, previously with free movement, now this scheme, would mean many more people coming into this country, undercutting British workers. And continuing the stagnation of wages we have suffered from for so many decades.

And on the case of laws and taking back control of their, very concerned about the threat of ECJ oversight over these trade arrangements. Potentially as part of a new veterinary agreement, or deals on meat and dairy. Again, I very much hope the Minister can absolutely definitively rule out any extension of ECJ engagement. Oversight. The fact is, and we see it from the amendment they proposed to the motion today, Madame Deputy Speaker, they do not believe in Brexit.

I really another Green Party for the amendment they table. It is there, you see the true voice of the pro-European movement. It is also a parody of a suggestion that free movement and rejoining the EU is what the country needs and of national interest. And indeed, suggesting it would be a way to counter the hard right. Have they seen what is going on in Europe? Where the extension of these principles, of an ever closer union, deeper alignment, concentration of power at the European level, is stoking the fire right across Europe.

The fundamental point, why the Conservative party has always been so successful historically, is because we spoke for those people, who otherwise would be outrage, that is why Reform have been doing so well, and I don't associate them with the far right. But what they do speak for is outraged members of the public, many of us whom to use to vote for us, many of whom vote for the party opposite, who feel their party has let them down in politics them behind. And politics is across the European Union in a more deadly way, so encountering the danger of the right, we should be absolutely clear, there will be no suggestion for any return into the EU.

And lastly, let me finish on reform. Because they are not here anymore. There you go. They have got a rather amusing amendment to the motion, which simply replaces the words of reform. They're kind of piggybacking somewhat good work, in a desperate search to be relevant and to catch up with the Conservative party, leading the way on this agenda. It is a bit of a problem, two things occur to me, one thing is I cannot even write an amendment on their

**** Possible New Speaker ****

own. The honourable member might reflect that these amendments were not even selected, so he should

**** Possible New Speaker ****

not even selected, so he should It demonstrates we are on the same page with them and I deeply same page with them and I deeply regret their opposition to what we

**** Possible New Speaker ****

are trying to do. They are not here so I will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

They are not here so I will answer on their respect. They are not on the same page as us because there's didn't fit and it wasn't a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

problem. Gentlemen should know that he should be addressing the chair and should be addressing the chair and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

not the back of the chamber. Everything goes wrong when we mention reform so best to leave that mention reform so best to leave that topic. I want to pay tribute to our Frontbencher I think of put forward a very important and principled a very important and principled statement of the declaration of our party. We support the decision of the British people to leave the European Union. We cannot hear the party opposite make the same, but I will give way quickly.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Trying to understand at some point if we will hear anything from point if we will hear anything from the leading opposition party about what could be improved in the Brexit agreement. We are not talking about agreement. We are not talking about getting a better Brexit agreement. And they saying can anything be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

improved on? If so, how? Let's leave that whole topic to another day. The Brexit agreement another day. The Brexit agreement and we negotiate is the problem, the and we negotiate is the problem, the EU. They are protectionist block. We EU. They are protectionist block. We decide to leave because we believe in sovereignty, in leaving a declining quarter of the world's economy. The problem is the trade economy. The problem is the trade barriers that we erected which is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

harmful to both parties. May I start with a warning to my

**** Possible New Speaker ****

May I start with a warning to my colleagues elected after 2024? Many of us who were here in 2017 to 2019 have been deeply triggered by this debate today. Rerunning the debates of old, rehashing the scars on all our back. I warn you, do not go down that rabbit hole. I wage that the member opposite is laughing because he knows.
16:48
Stella Creasy Portrait Ms Stella Creasy MP (Walthamstow, Labour )
-
-
If she wants to not go down that rabbit hole, she should be talking

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to the government on the frontbench. And Bugs Bunny did appear. We

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And Bugs Bunny did appear. We have heard from my former 33 years have heard from my former 33 years ago as a young campaigner about the merits working with Europe who was merits working with Europe who was on the other bus in the debates about Brexit, and that is exactly it. Constituency might listen to it. Constituency might listen to this, they would be horrified to CS this, they would be horrified to CS going backwards again, acting as if the last 10 years hadn't happened, as if there wasn't evidence about as if there wasn't evidence about what Brexit means.

So avoidance of doubt, I do not want to try the patience of the Deputy Speakers it was at this it through many a was at this it through many a lengthy speech. When I was 15, he

**** Possible New Speaker ****

was like this as well. It's the government trying to take us back to the past. Brexit take us back to the past. Brexit gives this country's new future and the government is trying to turn the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

clock back. That is what's wrong. I have a horrible feeling if we were to compare the speech he made today with many of the speeches he made between 2017 and 2019, he might made between 2017 and 2019, he might find that he would lose the just a minute competition about repetition because that is going backwards. because that is going backwards. This country deserves better, so let me start with a clear statement of intent. Brexit has happened. I am intent.

Brexit has happened. I am not here to prosecute the arguments to rejoin. We have not got time for that. What we need is a salvage operation because of the damage that operation because of the damage that it has done. Especially in a world with so much uncertainty where tariffs are now part and parcel of the everyday conversation and the damage that is being done to our constituents. We can fight many constituents. We can fight many things in life but geography really isn't one of them.

However hard some isn't one of them. However hard some of the members on the opposite benches try. We heard from the member from East Wiltshire that Smith that the isolation to our status that Brexit has brought would bring us strength. The last 10 years, the last six months have shown how clearly that is not the case, in fact, we are uniquely isolated and at risk as a nation. That is why it is absolutely right what this government is doing getting on, signing trade deals, trying to sort out the damage done and looking for that hat-trick.

But I have to say is the members opposite that there is no conspiracy here because those of us who were here in 2019 remember exactly the details of that deal and the fact that written into it was a five year review process, so all you are seeing of next Monday is not some secret negotiation. It is part of the trade and cooperation process. I hear the member saying Hang on, I see his tinfoil, but I really beg him to look at the details of the bill which said very clearly that there would be a renegotiation point where we would review whether or not it was working, and I'm sorry the shadow minister is not in his place to try to claim affinity with Sam Beckett because frankly, I suspect he will be more like Jim Trott from the vicar of deeply.

No, no, no, no, no, no, and then having to say yes. The summit is not the end but the start of the process of reviewing the trade and cooperation agreements, and looking at what is in the best interest of this country. I am committed to the idea that there should be parliamentary scrutiny. My colleagues and the frontbench will know I have concerns that the scrutiny committee was deleted. We should be able to discuss these matters, but there ought to be a summit first for us to have something to discuss.

That is why we will account for me putting an outfit for the committee that the member for Skegness who is not in his place which is a shame because I'm sure he would like to talk about the benefits of Brexit and other mythical creatures. We would have a debate after the summit so we as parliamentarians may properly examine what comes out of it, but the summit is about the starting gun, not the final deal. And it is really important to look at it in that way because the test for the motion today is the opposition really telling us that the trade agreement is perfection? There is absolutely nothing in that trade agreement that they wouldn't wish to amend, to revise, to refine.

Is there nothing in the last five years and they are not troubled by? The fact that there are 1.8 million fewer jobs in our economy because of the Tory hard Brexit, a figure that the academics who studied this will rise to 3,000,000 x 20 35. The fact that trade is down 27% with the European Union, a block that we do five times more trade than we do with America, that 16,000 businesses have given up trading with Europe altogether because the truth about Brexit is it was just paperwork.

Reams and reams and reams of it. And small businesses in this country have sadly had to up sticks. I declare an interest as the chair of the Labour movement for Europe and I am not arguing for rejoin but I am a red against red tape, and what I see is the amount of paperwork. I am loving the fact that members are going through the position as if it is some revelation. Perhaps they can borrow some tinfoil from other members about the idea that there is some conspiracy.

They would do better to reflect on the impact of a border traitor operating on a self- inflicted wound on British farmers and British food supply chains pushing up inflation because they were charging for pallets of food coming into the country, creating more and more paperwork. So unless the members opposite genuinely telling us that they think chefs kiss for the trade and cooperation agreement, then actually, it is right to look at whether there are things that we can do to deal with the problems it has created for our constituents, like the 6.95 it has created for our constituents, like the £6.95 of additional cost to households, and indeed, to account for some of the myths that have been created, and the member for East Wiltshire accused me of being obsessed, but he said that somehow, being out of European Union made our response to COVID better.

He might want to go and talk to the UK covert enquiry that found that it was the reverse, that it was our failure to prepare that was increased by the fact that we were dealing with a no deal Brexit harmed our response. He might even want to reflect the UK medicines regulator who said that we could have used the emergency processes to bring forward our own vaccine which I'm sure is what he was talking about. He also talked about Ukraine. He might want to reflect on how how hard it was for us to make the case about the importance of standing with Ukraine outside of the room, that those who are less convinced would have had our message more clearly if we were inside the room, particularly about gas import, so we championed Ukraine but we had to shout from outside rather than being part of the conversations from the start.

This summit needs a strong agenda and that is exactly what this government is talking about, and agenda focused on fixing the problems that this trade and cooperation agreement has created, and that is what the public want. They agree with us. They don't want us to spend time looking at 10 to 5 years of treaty renegotiation, the possibility of rejoin. They want us to salvage this question from the damage that Brexit has done, two thirds of this country so that Brexit is bad for the cost of living.

65% say it had a negative impact on the economy. Members opposite may want to say that is twice as many people who think immigration is bad for our economy. The British public are not daft. They are wise about what needs to happen next. They understand the value of a defence deal. They understand that in a world with Putin at our doorstep with the challenges we face and the uncertainty in other parts of the world, it will complement NATO to work more closely with our European counterparts to increase investment in the UK defence industry and collaborate on crime.

Those of us used to have Constituencies needs were served by the EU know the damage for the previous government deal has done. Those of us who want to see us stepping up to collaborate on international aid know that we need to get around the table with our European counterparts. That is the best way to tackle those people who may be fleeing persecution and become stuck in a boat, to try and stop conflict at the source. That they understand the value of the deal as my colleague from Wales talked about, the value of the Mediterranean convention that deals with paperwork because it is about rules of origin, that when you bring a tomato into this country, there is now extra paperwork coming with that.

They want us to look at VAT rules because small businesses are struggling with 27 different VAT regimes, and yes, they would want us to sort out the carbon border adjustment mechanism because that is how we save British Steel because British Steel will be affected if there is a divergence, so we need to look at how those trading schemes can be linked and we can save British business £800 million and the charges. They want us to look at mutual conformity assessment to try and reduce the duplication.

They want common sense on regulation because the previous government tried to bring in separate regulatory regimes and understandably, British business and that is twice the cost. They want to sell to their neighbours and not to have extra pieces of paperwork. The previous government tried to have us have separate regulations on airline safety as if an aeroplane taking off in London would need to follow a different set of regimes if it landed in Berlin. It's bonkers. Understandably, we walked back from it.

We shouldn't go back to those kinds of arguments just because those on the opposite benches have a blindness about summing to do with Europe. This government has got its head on. It's looking at what it can do to help the industry, helps supply chains, and of course, it is looking at youth mobility because this is a summit. It is about having the conversation, looking at details, and how we can support apprenticeships. Youth mobility is a freedom of movement. I will have heard complaints about freedom deal with Canada, with Uruguay, with New Zealand.

I presume she is going to call for the abolition of freedom of movement from Canada then because that would be consistency. We also could do more to help our creative services and yes, resolve some of the tensions in Northern Ireland. Many of us feel deeply how the people of Northern Ireland suffer the most as a result of the Tory high Brexit and yes, we could do a deal on fishing. We could sort out the fisheries industry which was sold out by the last government and could support them to be sustainable.

These are issues we can return to in the Frontbench debate but we cannot do that if we don't have a summit. We can't walk into the summit saying no. We need to walk in saying what gives? What are the opportunities here? How do we solve some of these challenges? One of my next door neighbours was Winston Churchill. We have become the defendants of his vision of ending conflict in Europe because the members opposite are spending all of their time fighting with each all of their time fighting with each We need to talk about the future, we need to get away from the fantasies that somehow Brexit will deliver and start getting back to actually the cost of living crisis in our communities.

I can't resist, I was

**** Possible New Speaker ****

going to sit down I promise. ... Which does that. Winston

**** Possible New Speaker ****

... Which does that. Winston Churchill had a few battles in his Churchill had a few battles in his own party. She talked about conflict within the Conservative party, Churchill was not adverse that, Churchill was not adverse that, sometimes you have to stand up for what is right which is what Brexiteers in this party did, but that she really think Winston that she really think Winston Churchill would have supported the shape of the EU as it currently is? Does she really think he would have supported what is CHRO's become? How

**** Possible New Speaker ****

supported what is CHRO's become? How can she possibly claim Winston Churchill for the politics that she stands for? Actually think Winston Churchill's public turning in his Churchill's public turning in his grave to see what the Conservative party has become a way in which the Conservative party's libertarian wing and the proud defence of our ability to participate in international organisations to speak up for freedom, speak a shared up for freedom, speak a shared interest in the national interest has diminished as a result of the way in which the previous government approached Brexit, and now, how his approached Brexit, and now, how his benches do.

Madame Deputy Speaker, I want to draw to a close. The world is changing, we are living in a world where trade, security, cooperation, climate issues, move at a pace, where many of us could not have predicted, remember it is only 120 days since President Trump was elected, what could happen next? Nevermore have we needed good relationships with our neighbours. Monday is about being good Monday is about being good neighbours. We see the world might be changing, but this is the same old Conservative party and indeed, the same page as reform.

Because that is all they seem to care about, we care about the British interest, look forward to hearing what comes out at the summit and other public people participating in a backbench debate to discuss it accordingly.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

That is really taking back control. Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker. It is good to be a tribute into this, and in a matter of Churchill, I am of course one of the successes I am of course one of the successes to Churchill in Dundee, he was defeated by the only prohibitionist ever elected, it was after his defeat of course he went on to defeat of course he went on to making speeches about Europe, after he joined the Conservative party. Madame Deputy Speaker, in a moment, Madame Deputy Speaker, in a moment, I suspect I will slip into the same levels of exasperation as expressed by the Member for Walthamstow.

I hope she doesn't mind me saying, we hope she doesn't mind me saying, we agree on so much. But before I do that, let me thank the Conservative party for bringing this motion
17:03
Stephen Gethins Portrait Stephen Gethins MP (Arbroath and Broughty Ferry, Scottish National Party)
-
-
party for bringing this motion today. I have to say, I must salute there, how should one put it, their courage in bringing this today. There is nobody saying that there There is nobody saying that there Brexit has been a success. And for that, I very much feel they are leading with their chin today. Nobody is arguing we are talking about something that has gone well, nobody is arguing this is something that has become a triumph, but rather, we are debating and discussing today how to tackle the problem.

It is a problem that has been well set out by the government, and Brexit, I am sorry to say, continues to cast a spell over the political classes in Westminster. When we have had a rerun of some of the arguments today, as some of the falsehoods, I am sorry to say, that have been spoken about the European Union, but let's talk about the evidence and I'm going to talk about it briefly, as well covered. The 4% drop in GDP that the Treasury had outlined to us.

The 15% drop in trade that was part of the budget documents. The UK has now lost more than it ever contributed financially, with absolutely nothing financially, with absolutely nothing in return. The loss of jobs. The loss of regional structural funds that were never ever replaced, despite the promises. The loss of opportunities for SMEs. And critically, the loss of opportunities for our young people. Is it any wonder, does nobody ever ask themselves, I can remember when the Brexiteers told us that lots of countries would follow the UK out the door.

Nobody has followed the UK outdoor. And I wonder why. And it leads into that sense of British exceptionalism that we hear time and exceptionalism that we hear time and time again. The UK has been left impoverished as a direct consequence of those arguments that have been made, and I have to say, and I have heard the warm words from the Labour benches about wanting to be closer to Europe, but they are fundamentally grabbing hold of hard Tory Brexit. And I fail to see why it is a Labour government, a Labour government, does not stand up for Europe more.

And rather than trying to imitate failed Conservative policies and failed Reform policies, let's not forget, Madame Deputy Speaker, Reform have a track record and it is not a good one, taking on a track record, ANNABEL HALES:, and before we move on to the Treasury, before moving to some point, I will give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Is pointing to an empty bench. I haven't turned up. But on the struggles, I know he wouldn't want it anyway to say something misleading, and in my constituency, after Brexit we attract the funding after Brexit we attract the funding from government, to 60-£70 million, four rows, leisure centre, in our town centre, and on the issue of town centre, and on the issue of money, does he know, last year in the EU, it cost £17 billion to be on that, what sort of price is that?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that, what sort of price is that? 17 billion is less than half the amount we have lost to public finances, not my figures, the mayor of London's figures. 17 billion he says without getting anything back says without getting anything back in return. And on that point, 300 million lost to the Scottish government in terms of money that is just not come from regional just not come from regional structural funds. Let me take the point of devolution and of point of devolution and of sovereignty.

The EU is a union fit for the 21st century. The UK union is barely a union fit for the 18th- century, because it has not been modernised since. We have got a Brexit settlement that ripped up the evolution settlement, opposing deals, an act which Scottish Labour and others spoke out against which they have now imposed for imposing a deal on devolved administration, so the EU could never do and its member states, and I will remind members, I will remind them, that not one of the 27 independent sovereign member states of the EU consider themselves states of the EU consider themselves any less independent, any less sovereign, from being a member of the European Union.

Not one of them. Just one does and it is this exceptionalism that British nationalist exceptionalism that is so damaging, that is so utterly damaging, to everybody in the UK. It is particularly... You know, the most sovereign country in the world is North Korea. The most sovereign country. Because with deals, we give a tiny bit of sovereignty. So, all these other states that see themselves as sovereign, he talks of Ukraine, the Ukraine wants to join the EU, he talks of democracy, the Democrats in Georgia and Moldova, who drape themselves in European flags because they see that as a future for the rule of law, they see that as a future of democracy, and I see that as a future for the greater wealth of the country.

Because we know, difficulty that has joined the EU got better off. The one country that left got worse off. And its citizens have fewer rights. On the questions of security, we all have to recognise the EU is a security actor. And the majority of European states now see the EU and NATO as twin pillars of that security. The sovereign states see that. Now, while I welcome the UK government's utterly steadfast support for Ukraine, and previous administrations as well, and I will acknowledge that.

We are not realistic about the challenges we face. Putin's Russia fears the EU, that is why we saw the initial war in Ukraine in 2014, because of the EU accession agreement. We know that. Everyone else gets it. Except those in the United Kingdom. The EU provides food security, for its members. Energy security for its members. And sitting outside leaves us more isolated and less secure. Why is it the UK are so utterly exceptional? What makes the UK so special that everybody else has got it wrong? What the UK has somehow got it right.

It is a piece of nonsense and a piece of nonsense that is damaging us all. Let me, young people, I am getting tired of talk of the scheme. First of all, I would like the Minister to tell me whether or not a youth mobility scheme is taking place, and how does that compare with the free movement we all enjoyed at that time? We are leaving younger generations with fewer rights, fewer opportunities, than we are ourselves enjoyed, that is a failure of our political generation.

An abject failure of our political generation. The Prime Minister's rhetoric yesterday, I am sorry to say, feeds into that. To be called out by Lord Dubs, a Labour member of the House of Lords. And yet, praised by the leader of alternative Deutschland. Should surely cause Labour members some toys for reflection. Some reflection to see themselves -- Some pose for reflection, some reflection to see themselves as we see them right now. I would have expected it from Reform and others, but not the Labour Party.

I did not expect that from the Labour Party. The worst part of this is we are getting this from a Labour government that doesn't really believe in what they are doing. I know that from working with them over the years. They do not believe in the damage it is doing. You know what is damaging as in politics right now, and I will finish here, Madame Deputy Speaker, what is damaging us in politics is people are standing up for things they do not believe in, they don't say what they believe in.

I believe in leaving the European Union. He talks about Parliament, I just heard that, in Parliament where the idea of sovereignty we have heard is not even, we do not have an idea of British sovereignty. The definition of Scottish sovereignty, and it is different to the idea of English sovereignty. Where the expression of Parliament does not exist I will appoint.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think it is fair to say that in the years I have been here, generally people don't have that, generally people don't have that, but his view is we lost one -- To referendums.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

referendums. I am surprised he didn't take on the substance of what I said, but rather the semantics. A Secretary of rather the semantics. A Secretary of State for Scotland said, it ceases to be a democracy when it ceases to have the ability to change its mind. My appeal would be this, yes I My appeal would be this, yes I believe in independence. Yes I believe the UK has a model European believe the UK has a model European Union doesn't, and I respect them for that.

I know the Scottish Labour for that. I know the Scottish Labour members disagree with me on that and I respect them for that as well. What I struggle with is that we know this is about deal with Europe, we this is about deal with Europe, we know that staying outside the custom single market is making us poorer every day. I would encourage members to stand up and say what they really believe in, to put the cases of what they believe in, because that is the they believe in, because that is the way to return respect back in to politics.

Not repeat what has been said in the past, but truly look to said in the past, but truly look to the future. Thank you, Madame Deputy Speaker.
17:13
Joe Morris Portrait Joe Morris MP (Hexham, Labour)
-
-
I will keep my remarks fairly brief. Don't want to intrude on some very good and well-informed speeches. On the point of respect and speaking to what you believe in, it is worth remembering the poison brought into the party, and in the election, I was concerned about the return of the CAP reform Council whose Facebook page has been described as a slew of anti-Muslim content, that worries me and a lot of my constituents and a lot of people in the country, I am very grateful for vetting processes.

But to return to the matter at hand, I meet every -- Every week with businesses in my committees, farmers, small businesses, that they want to export, that they do not feel they want to have the -- They have the facilities in place to do so. There are fears in the Brexit deal, I know there are many sober and mature members on the other side that recognise the shortcomings. And what this summit is an opportunity to do is to recognise that we live in a world that is changing every single day, with the demands of yesterday are not the same as the demands of tomorrow.

We have a government that is looking to ensure the reasonable and responsible thing to do and improve the day-to-day lives of our constituents, which is what we are sent here to do. When I speak to farmers who suffered from the red tape that they were caught up in trying to export, what small businesses do not have access to, the roles were straighter access programs that larger businesses do, to go abroad, that was one of the major failings of the previous governance trade policy, I do hope it is one the Minister will address.

How we can get small businesses exporting across the world, as part of the trade deals we just signed. I think it is really important that we do not go into the kind of conspiracy theory baiting on backsliding in the EU, and what it does and does not mean. I don't particularly care about chasing views from Elon Musk. I care about getting good results for my constituents, to get results for them, good jobs for them, good outcomes for them. For far too long, my constituency, in my view, was denied a voice, because it was conservative.

It was one where you went up every six weeks and you didn't really engage with the issues. And actually, we have a school in my constituency, built eight And actually, we have a school in my constituency, built 8.5 years ago, it was already structurally unsound, which is a pretty damning failure of the Conservative party. But we need to make sure the current system that we have inherited works properly. And what I would encourage the Minister to do is work out the kinks in the deal that are not working as they should be, work out what is going on, work out what is holding businesses back and approach it with a mature, honest and genuine discussion on how we can improve things because ultimately, it is a potting shed card that we achieve more in Devon, and that is what we need to approach, pragmatism, doesn't fulfil into some of the appalling cynicism and rather brutal mischaracterisation that we see the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you for calling me to contribute on the summit next contribute on the summit next Monday. As someone who has followed these matters reasonably closely for these matters reasonably closely for a number of years, there are areas I would like to focus on. Firstly, I would like to focus on. Firstly, I would like to say something about a
17:16
Mark Francois Portrait Rt Hon Mark Francois MP (Rayleigh and Wickford, Conservative)
-
-
would like to say something about a very worrying suggestion. We are about to waive our fishing rights. Thirdly, the potential for so-called dynamic alignment by which the United Kingdom would become a passive rule taker despite having voted peacefully and democratically. Can I pay my personal tribute to Sir Roy Stone who tragically just passed away? He was my constituents living just a few minutes away. I once inadvertently canvassed during the local elections highly professional local elections highly professional public servant who was inscrutable about his thoughts.

I worked with him and he was always very patient, him and he was always very patient, especially with me. He always gave well-informed and uncanny advice and believed passionately in the institution of Parliament and the principle of representative democracy which he served so well. Our thoughts and prayers are with his widowed Dawn and with her family. May he rest in peace but always be warmly remembered. A summit will take place next month, and I recall being told repeatedly during the campaign that if we left the EU, we would be isolated and friendless.

With all the meetings taking place at Lancaster House regarding the so-called coalition of the whip, it shows how absolutely ludicrous that assertion actually was. However, according to reports, it seems that this could include a pack between ourselves and the European Union. Hopefully, we will have a lot more to say on these matters next week once things are been made public, and crucially, we have had an opportunity to read the small print. Nevertheless, I'm sure that the government's tactics will be to try and talk almost exclusively about defence.

As a form of camouflage in order to mask likely concessions both on fishing rights and potentially relating to our food as well. When the British people voted democratically to leave the EU, nine years ago now, they did so in order to decide their destiny for themselves. It would be completely against the spirit of democracy under the guise of some kind of reset to the EU to surrender that principle next week. Moreover, after the absolute chaos over the Labour government's proposed deal, only yesterday, the Spanish Foreign Minister was saying that the UK should make concessions over the sovereignty of Gibraltar as part of our reset at the summit.

This despite the fact that Gibraltarians themselves voted 99% to maintain the current position on the referendum. In the premise, we came to agree what was known as the corporation agreement at the TCA. While there is much talk, there was a major comprehensive trade deal with the EU negotiating the member for Bournemouth. It was 1244 pages long. I know because I read it. In essence, the TCA guaranteed free trade between the UK and the EU.

Moreover, because we left the EU including the customs union, that meant we were able to negotiate unilateral trade deals of our own around the world. Whilst in the customs union, it was only possible to negotiate those agreements collectively through the auspices of the EU itself. That is a fundamental difference. It is important to note that using this critical Brexit freedom since we left the EU, we have been able to negotiate almost 80 independent trade deals with nations around the world including important Commonwealth partners such as Australia, New Zealand, and now with India as well.

We have also joined the transpacific partnership which improves access to Asian markets work literally trillions of dollars. Moreover, if you let me finish this point, I will. Moreover, I want to enjoy this bit. We now have the delightful visit of having the ambassador to the US, one Lord Mandelson, having to acknowledge albeit through metaphorically gritted teeth that we have only been able to negotiate a trade deal with US because we left his beloved European union.

I think our Peter is struggling with that. The lady has been patient.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you to the member for giving way. If those trade deals giving way. If those trade deals with such wonderful deals, can be honourable member explained to me honourable member explained to me why our seafood sales to the EU plummeted by 80% since the Brexit plummeted by 80% since the Brexit deal? Why did that happen?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

deal? Why did that happen? She pre-empts me. I will get to fishing very shortly. Within the fishing very shortly. Within the TCA, specifically under part two heading five, there were transition heading five, there were transition arrangements relating to fishing. In essence, this allowed for a period essence, this allowed for a period of over five years. There was maritime arrangements and the UK maritime arrangements and the UK will become solely responsible for its own territorial boundaries out its own territorial boundaries out to nautical miles in some places.

As this transition period is now approaching its exploration in 2026, the EU are pushing very hard in order to maintain their access to our fishing waters, and it would seem they had to expand access in certain cases where we naive enough to give in. It would be a complete betrayal if the UK Labour government was now to grant major concessions to the EU in what will become our own sovereign waters come 2026. The bourgeoisie will have to wait.

While our sovereign rights are in signed in wider maritime law, we have yet to see the final details at whatever Faustian pact was agreed on fishing, but our fishermen and those on our benches, not reform, will be able to watch the government very closely and will be alert to the prospects of a sell-out, and then we come to of a sell-out, and then we come to veterinary matters and on food which would involve the United Kingdom in a process known as dynamic alignment.

In essence, this means if the EU were in anyway to change or modify its rules in those areas, we would then be compelled to follow them regardless of the wishes of our own Parliament. In other words, we would become a raw taker in these areas even though we have left the European Union. Moreover, these arrangements will apply across the whole of the UK and in the event of a dispute that will be arbitrated by the court of justice rather than the UK court or even an international tribunal.

Again, to have left the EU and to submit to becoming a passive rule taker would be entirely contrary to the spirit of the 2016 referendum. That is why time and again today, no government minister will admit that they are going to do it next week. When Labour talked about a reset at the general election manifesto, there was absolutely no reference to rule taking as part of any such accommodation. Labour would therefore be giving away our rights without the consent of the British people which is something that has to be fairly overturned.

The prospect of additional concessions over everything from so-called youth mobility schemes, euphemism under another government, to capitulation's over net-zero mechanisms and specifically the EU's carbon border adjustment mechanism will see what will make our industries even more internationally unfit. So, as someone who sat here in the previous parliament and witnessed night after night and week after week that then Labour shadow secretary now the Prime Minister attempting to poll every single procedural book from the depth of her skin may, in order to keep this country in the European Union at almost any price, and despite the referendum, I am in no way surprised that his government are now attempting this active pixelation.

He remains a Remainer and in his heart of hearts, he always will. So, what Labour are up to is trying to use a defence pact in order to hide it to begin a process of gradually taking us back to walls and back into the EU if they thought they could get away with it. They will never risk another referendum because in 2016, almost up to the last-minute, the polls were showing that remain might win and when it came to it, the British people had the temerity to vote to govern themselves despite the best efforts of the British establishment and project fear.

Therefore, what Labour will try and do is to get us back in gradually by a process of grandmother footsteps or to make another analogy like trying to slowly boiler frog. If they get away with submission next week, despite their manifesto commitments, they will eventually try to take us back into the single market and then get away with that, then they will suggest that we might as well rejoin the customs union, then put the argument the British people that we are so far back into the thing we might as well go the whole hog and rejoin it entirely.

All without a vote or the consent of the people of the UK at any stage whatsoever.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I want to draw something else on this because dynamic alignment is this because dynamic alignment is not a small thing. It is huge because it is rule taking. Could you imagine any other trade arrangement imagine any other trade arrangement that we would engage in in the USA that we would engage in in the USA or Australia where we would be in a position to say we will accept your

**** Possible New Speaker ****

rules and your adjudication? It would be far better to do this to a process of mutual enforcement of which my friend has always been a staunch advocate. We will ask the staunch advocate. We will ask the Minister summing up in this debate if he will very clearly rule out any if he will very clearly rule out any prospect of dynamic alignment at the summit next week. It is a yes or no question, and perhaps the Minister question, and perhaps the Minister on the bench at that time because he wouldn't answer my right honourable friend yesterday could give us an honest answer to an honest question.

If he wants to do it now, I will give way to him. A stunning silence. As he hasn't got the guts to get up,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I will give way to his backbencher. Thank you. My Jacobean friend has

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. My Jacobean friend has taken a question and I am grateful. taken a question and I am grateful. I didn't want you to finish because I wanted the opportunity to answer the question which my friend put to the question which my friend put to him. The export of UK seafoods has fallen by 80% since Brexit. The has been new checks, new bureaucracy, what would he put this down to? Is what would he put this down to? Is it a Brexit or something else that the exports of seafood have

**** Possible New Speaker ****

collapsed? People have made market choices.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

People have made market choices. Under the Fishermans policy, we had the absurdity of the so-called discards process where, to comply discards process where, to comply with EU quotas, our fishing had to throw back into the sea fish, many throw back into the sea fish, many of which were already dead in order to comply with the absurdities of to comply with the absurdities of the CFP. Hopefully we will never

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I have looked at this closely and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I have looked at this closely and the reason is the UK is not in the single market and do not give effect to the laws and so the procedure is to check every consignment of to check every consignment of shellfish coming in to see if it applies, even though all the EU law tells us that the cheques for clean tells us that the cheques for clean rivers, water, beaches does exist to a clear extent in the UK than it

**** Possible New Speaker ****

does in the EU. I defer to my honourable friend who is an expert in this area. who is an expert in this area. Others want a chance to speak as well and so I will wrap up by saying well and so I will wrap up by saying Labour will go with dynamic element and will sign us up as a passive and will sign us up as a passive rotator at the behest of the EU, despite the British people voting in 2016 to take back control of their 2016 to take back control of their laws.

I have no doubt that if they get away with this surrender assignment early next week, that is precisely what Labour will do and so it is very important that we alert the British people and the media who serve them and there is an attempt to deter it before it gets any worse. In summary, if we are not going to go with the Prime Minister on this, the man who is a gruff, and you'll surrender this to the EU which has no democratic mandate and eventually we will have to overturn this.

Remember that big in the referendum, 'this is your decision ducts the government will implement what you decide'. Britain wants to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

take control of their own laws and they voted for it. It is not for Labour to give them away. This has been an interesting
17:33
Richard Baker Portrait Richard Baker MP (Glenrothes and Mid Fife, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

This has been an interesting debate but reflecting on the debate but reflecting on the unhappiness, it is clear some people are not able to be one. The summit is there because of the process agreed by this party foul and government. This is a success for business people and we can only achieve that if we move on. I thought that Bill Capp was going to stand up and contributed one point. If we are not able to think of the real priorities are critical and the future relationship with Europe but others are prepared to move on.

I was happy to be with the Scottish Advisory Forum on Europe, known as SAFE,m and it was an excellent event reflecting great work and collaborative with colleagues and counterparts in Europe, not just in government but civil society, academia, a whole range of organisations dove collaborating because it is in their interests and about growing the Scottish economy and the interests of the Scottish people. I have to pay tribute to my good friend who was the chair of SAFE and has done so much to drive this forward and what great people they are and they are doing vital work.

This is the spirit in which we should go into these negotiations, collaboration, mutual benefit, and seeing a better future relationship with our colleagues in the European Union. It is so important that comments are welcome, to hear that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the Minister... I will of course give way. All I want to do is put on record

**** Possible New Speaker ****

All I want to do is put on record my thanks to Ivy -- Irene Oldfather my thanks to Ivy -- Irene Oldfather and I think we could all learn from her work.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

This issue of learning, it is so

**** Possible New Speaker ****

This issue of learning, it is so welcome to hear that the Minister for the Constitution and European Relations attended a meeting with SAFE yesterday which I told was held SAFE yesterday which I told was held at the offices of the Scottish Whisky Association so I hope you enjoyed some whisky. It's important enjoyed some whisky. It's important to mention that through the trade deal with India, this is securing £1 deal with India, this is securing £1 million for the industry over the next five years and 1200 jobs, a next five years and 1200 jobs, a fantastic deal which is not frustrating and is a better deal as well.

I young people yesterday who are keen to look at the future in Europe rather than debating the battles of the past. They asked the Minister to find ways that in the future they have the opportunity to work and study in Europe and I hope that the Minister can't think inventively about how this can be achieved within the policy framework that the government has set out. It is the case that the previous Erasmus+ scheme is important for the young people who participated and also to the economy in Scotland.

It was worth £340 million annually, delivering 7 pounds in value for everyone pounds invested. Economic growth is the priority for the government and it would not be putting national interest first for the government to change course in the negotiations in the way proposed by the Opposition rather than proceeding with the vital work that I know has been taken forward with European counterparts at a thing to do for economic growth, the national interest, and the current approach is essential and it recognises the status of the EU as our biggest trading partner, accounting for 41% of exports and 51% of imports.

I'm encouraged to hear that these vital areas for growth in my constituency of Glenrothes in Fife including closer cooperation on energy policy which might include increasing cooperation with the North Sea Energy Corporation Group, that these are issues on the agenda for next week and I hope the measures will benefit small businesses in my constituency, particularly in the creative sector. It is right that this party commits to making it easier for musicians to tour in Europe and that is vital for the future of the sector in Scotland and the UK and I quote that we can make progress in the UK as well.

We have got to respect the decision of the Brexit referendum. And we should not repeat all of the issues and others you repeat the mistakes of the previous government in key areas of policy. This government has made significant progress in resetting relationship of the UK with the EU in our national interest and, in particular, in line with government policy on economic growth. I urge... I will certainly give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable friend for giving the aunties cupboard farmers, businesses, young people, the businesses, young people, the creative sector. Is it true that all these groups are simply looking for practical measures the government practical measures the government can take to improve their lot and the relationship that we have with the relationship that we have with Europe and that could involve cutting red tape, unlocking energy, deepening security cooperation, without being to the detriment of the previous agreement.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the previous agreement. I could not agree more. It is the case. We are doing far better than case. We are doing far better than the very poor deal is agreed by the previous government which resulted previous government which resulted in economic decline and that is in comparison to what we could to proceed with different approach. I proceed with different approach. I urge my honourable friend to regard urge my honourable friend to regard this as an area of policy and if the government should go further and government should go further and faster and I urge him not to be affected by those who wish to fight the battles of the past but instead look for a better relationship with Europe and deal with the tests that lie ahead for our continent.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

In human affairs, there is persistent fascination with novelty. persistent fascination with novelty. It is curious that people clamour to what is different, to the other, what is different, to the other, whatever that may look like. It is this fascination that leads to the similar interest in occupation with similar interest in occupation with internationalism even to the point that it means giving up power to that it means giving up power to summon beyond these shores. It is a summon beyond these shores.

It is a damaging preoccupation. As it is most curious, it leads the
17:41
John Hayes Portrait Rt Hon Sir John Hayes MP (South Holland and The Deepings, Conservative)
-
-
most curious, it leads the peculiarity of, I'm sorry he's not here because he made a remarkably articulate speech, as I told them, but the Member for Dundee has made but the Member for Dundee has made the case against nationalism. He is a member of a nationalist party. He is a member who believes in sovereignty, making an argument that sovereignty does not really matter. He qualify that by saying sovereignty in Scotland meant something different. Perhaps he and I will have the opportunity to debate that in the future.

It is what fuelled the sentiment that pervaded out of the referendum, particularly on the benches opposite and amongst the Liberals and, as a matter of record, I do not have a liberal Borden in my body and -- a liberal bone in my body. Welcome back to that. It led to those people who populated a good deal of the establishment, as the honourable member for Chelsea and Fulham will know, and surprisingly, they picked one of their own. It led to people who could not bear to come to terms with the results of the referendum.

The people had spoken. And, of course, the people's will directly contradicted the assumptions and presumptions of the establishment which they foisted on the people for donkeys years and I do not say all the guilt lies on the other side of the chamber because it was Ted Heath who sold out fisherman and it went on and there were a number of sins and the gallery is almost endless, Roy Jenkins, Peter Shaw for a Labour, Toby Ben made the case for national self-government in what I think was one of the best speeches, according to my honourable friend, who's also been here for donkeys years.

On our site, there was no exception either. And lamented friend. Michael foot, of course, on the other side. I was thinking of the great service which was given from someone who seemed like an outsider for the greater part of their career but then was proved right. My goodness, what is better than that in politics? The political career of Bill Cash was a success. I will happily give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It has not ended yet and he has been texting some of us throughout been texting some of us throughout the debate. His great success was the sovereignty clause that finally the sovereignty clause that finally

**** Possible New Speaker ****

said, after years of campaigning, "This Parliament is sovereign." That is on the statute book. My honourable friend is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My honourable friend is absolutely right. I can, alongside absolutely right. I can, alongside him, acknowledged that indeed Sir Bill has texted me, and my right Bill has texted me, and my right honourable friend, I gather. And honourable friend, I gather. And this tension, if you like, between the will of the people expressed at the referendum in 2016 and the the referendum in 2016 and the remaining prevailing assumptions of what I described earlier as the liberal establishment, that liberal establishment, that underpins this debate.

In the spirit of generosity, which I tend to of generosity, which I tend to employ, and, by the way, there are exceptions, I can be longer if you like, but it does add spirit. I want to say that there are those on the benches opposite and be had from the Member for Walthamstow and they would acknowledge that the referendum result cannot be reversed. They did not say that immediately afterwards, of course. They fought hard for ages to try to frustrate the outcome and used every Parliamentary technique they could conjure an extra parliamentary technics and well-funded legal cases to try to derail Brexit and so the scepticism personified by my honourable friend from Beaconsfield who said she was doubtful about the intent was well-founded.

I know the Minister would like to reassure us, when he rises, at the end of the debate, that in his case, it would be proven to be a prediction of what The scepticism is well-founded because of the history. It was a Labour politician that said you do not hear we have one. And of course we have the record book when it comes to the party opposite and, worse still, the party to my left. So, I hope that minister will, for example, be crystal-clear, as he has been invited to be throughout the course of this debate on alignment.

Dynamic and Edmund. Best described, I think, as dynamic realignment. Realigning our relationship with the EU. And that it will bring us closer to the EU, not our friends and neighbours in Europe, of course cooperation and collaboration is a natural part of mature policies. But closer to the EU in terms of governance, in terms of regulation, in terms of law, in terms of interference in our affairs and in terms, crucially, of jurisdiction. It is the exerciseable authority that real really make it clear.

Not the ability, indeed the willingness to share, but the danger of succumbing to a power that takes authority further and further from the British people, it was either Bournemouth West or East, let's just say Bournemouth. Bournemouth talked about some of the challenges faced in the world, the global challenges. The answer to those global challenges, he was right to do so, by the way, the first half of the speech, it was very good, it got worse as it went on when he raised good points, as I said at the time.

He asked -- the answer to those challenges is not to become more globalist and not to give in to those forces he described that are exerting power in an unaccountable way but actually to bring power back to the people. When we spoke of taking back control, those of us who advocated Brexit, we did so, in part, because we want power to be vested in this power accountable to whom the power effects. Madam Deputy Speaker you are almost a model for this.

Following the model. We are answerable to our constituents. We are known by our constituents and they understand that we make decisions on their behalf. New members of the House will be coming to terms with what that means my do not mind it myself but I can see list. For and that constant interaction with constituents is the lifeblood of democracy. However new member of Parliament was, I could not remember the Tories, netted on the other parties. They certainly did not enjoy when we were members of the EU, that mutual ownership.

They feel they own us and quite They feel they own us and quite right too, they do, do they not? I am being chided. I never knew who he was before then, and I say that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

without disrespect. I am happy to give way to you. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The right honourable gentleman is correct, and whilst I was in the correct, and whilst I was in the European Parliament we got some opinion poll research and without members could name a member of the European Parliament and 82% of British people could not name any member of the European Parliament member of the European Parliament and, regrettably, it was not him.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and, regrettably, it was not him. It is typical of the honourable gentleman's humility and good humour gentleman's humility and good humour to acknowledge that in the chamber in such an open way. Thank you so in such an open way. Thank you so much. So, scepticism that I have described and tried to articulate described and tried to articulate takes the form of real doubts about what realignment will really mean. what realignment will really mean. Let me just go through three or four specifics.

I spoke earlier about security and defence. Of course it is right that we have a continuing relationship with our neighbours in those terms. But we do work with the agencies across Europe. The critical security relationship we enjoy is with countries. We enjoy relations with many other countries of the world that are outside of that. And it is vitally important that we reinforce that. And that, of course, overlaps with our commitment to NATO and defence. And there may be some in information sharing.

There certainly is in various kinds of cooperation, but anything that undermines the sovereignty, to use the word again, of that security defence alliance seems, to me, to be holy questionable and possibly worse, risky. In terms of that when we think about the referendum, whilst, of course, it was not all about immigration, immigration was perhaps the most pressing issue during those times. People resented and resisted free movement. And they wanted to bring it to an end.

When they heard the term take back control, for many of them, that was epitomised by the need to control and decide who came here and who did not. And whilst it may be understandable, I do not want to works lyrical, about being able to travel across the continent, wild ACLS enthusiastically perhaps they do not say it at all because young people from the entire continent will want to travel here and until we know the terms of that, that could easily mean those people competing with Britons for scarce jobs.

We have large numbers of people are large numbers of people, young people, not in education, employment, and training. No Government has dealt with that satisfactorily. I started speaking about this more than 20 years ago. Previous Labour Governments, and indeed Conservative Governments did not really grasp that as firmly as they ought to have done. Sadly, if the trend is upwards, disturbing. And I want people in my country I do not want them to have to compete for education places, trading places, for other opportunities, with a large number, and we could be talking about tens of thousands of people entering the country by these means.

And there will be suspicions that it is the beginning of a return. What did that do? What did that do? They were right about this, I mean he is late, but nonetheless, we must welcome more converts with enthusiasm. What mass immigration did was displace investment in recruitment training and retention of workers. Displace investment on automation. And improving workplaces, making it far more dependent on low skilled labour. It had the effect of certifying the economy. And any suggestion that we may return to that would inhibit, perhaps ruin the government's intention of improving productivity because we really want to deal with productivity you have to create a high deal.

And I fear for that broader consideration won't necessarily hold sway when we get negotiations with the EU on this issue of some relaxation of the bar on free movement which was brought by the referendum. So, mindful that there are enthusiastic, insightful, polite colleagues on all sides of the House, but mainly on this side, that want to contribute to the debate, I withdraw my remarks to a close with this thought. And I can hear colleagues say no. I will resist those overtures and draw my remarks to a close with this remarks to a close with this thought.

CS Lewis said we are what we think we are. Now, I think we are a proud independent nation that is maybe disproportionate contribution as part of Western civilisation. I think that our paths are noble and something that can bring us a sense of achievement and pride. I do not buy this self-loathing that seems to have taken hold with two much of the establishment. I do not know if the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

honourable gentleman themselves no. I trust a lot I hope the honourable gentleman trusted earlier when I said how excited I am for the prospect ahead of us. I just wanted prospect ahead of us. I just wanted to thank him for not only identifying me a couple of times and identifying me as associated with my constituents which I am certainly constituents which I am certainly very proud to be but not just the honourable gentleman and his colleagues for making me feel that having this place not just for 10 months but for 10 years and had the months but for 10 years and had the privilege of seeing a Brexit debate live and lodge again, it is a rare opportunity and thought I would get as a member of this House and I am most grateful.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

most grateful. I am because let him see it in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am because let him see it in this way, through this process. I am, for all intents and purposes, am, for all intents and purposes, Brexit. I am a patient proud of my Brexit. I am a patient proud of my working class origins, determined to do my best for my constituents in my country, driven by combinations of the national interest of the common the national interest of the common good. That was the spirit that inspired Brexit. Inspired those who campaigned for it and those who voted for it with 75% of my constituents.

I am a bit resentful, it was only 1% higher. So, CS Lewis said we are what we think we are, and I do think we are a proud country who can stand in the world in collaboration with nations, of course. But free and sovereign. You cannot have it both ways. We cannot say we have done a great deal with India because we did not have the EU. You cannot say we have done a great deal with the US and escape the clutches of the EU but actually we want to pull it back in.

We want them to have more say in any future deals we might do. And let me end with the words of one of my political heroes, Joan Chamberlain. Who understood that to protect our economy we need to protect the jobs industry and the enterprise that is part of it and not give into the free trade. And Chamberlain said a democratic Government resting on the support of the whole nation and not on the favour of any class would be very strong and know how to make itself respected and maintain the obligations and honour of the country.

No member of this House country. No member of this House should do less than that.
17:59
Luke Charters Portrait Mr Luke Charters MP (York Outer, Labour)
-
-
And now with an immediate three

**** Possible New Speaker ****

minute time limit, Luke Charters. This is a really important day as the UK rebuilt our relationship and this is a big issue for my this is a big issue for my constituents in your council because they were failed to provide for too they were failed to provide for too long but let me keep clear, before I get started, I cannot believe the party opposite think that they have party opposite think that they have the credibility to run an opposition day debate on this topic.

The absolute cheek of them is off the absolute cheek of them is off the scale. They come here to talk down to the merits of the youth mobility to the merits of the youth mobility to the merits of the youth mobility scheme, an arrangement, frankly, we have got with better non-EU countries already. What they're really doing is demonstrating yet again a prehistoric approach to again a prehistoric approach to young people across this country. No wonder support for them amongst the wonder support for them amongst the age group is virtually extinct.

They age group is virtually extinct. They want to deny a reset that benefits our national security, food security, and economic security,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

with our biggest proximity. I thank my right honourable friend forgiving way. And he has made an excellent and powerful speech. But he agreed that it is not about giving away power but it is about working with European members

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in our own mutual interest, of which there are benefits? That's why I think the party opposite are clearly responsible and opposite are clearly responsible and so out of step with reality that frankly I may as well be asking them to take advice from the Stone Age. to take advice from the Stone Age. They wanted to take back control Once upon a time, but the reality is Once upon a time, but the reality is they have completely lost control over the last 80 is, lost control over our economy, our borders, of over our economy, our borders, of our future, and a pragmatic sensible summit next week which is focused on summit next week which is focused on the future, not the past, a far cry from the chaos in the Conservative from the chaos in the Conservative from the chaos in the Conservative Let me move on to something we should all welcome, a youth mobility should all welcome, a youth mobility scheme.

It's important to strike the right balance with this just like we right balance with this just like we have done with other countries who we already share deals with. Let's talk about how this would matter to ordinary people. Nobody would want ordinary people. Nobody would want an 18-year-old at the start of their adult life to be limited to just 90 days per year in Europe. It is only natural to want to swap the UK for Barcelona for a year or so, or Barcelona.

As a parent in York, I would like for my children to have the privilege to enjoy an experience like the youth mobility scheme, an opportunity that could open minds and broaden horizons. Research from the University of Oxford have shown that people who go overseas come back and start social enterprises, the run ventures, tech start-ups, and that sounds good to me. I really important topic that we must address in the forthcoming summit if the issue of defence.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Before we leave young people, the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Before we leave young people, the question raised by the Opposition benches that were not doing enough for our own people I will cause for our own people I will cause for our own people I will cause problems, but the premises said that young people were at the front of the queue for skills and training and they have helped young and they have helped young engineers, chippies, brickies.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

engineers, chippies, brickies. I think it would be sensible,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think it would be sensible, pragmatic, and lead to opportunities across the continent. One Defence, B, I held a debate about the B, I held a debate about the benefits of a multilateral Defence benefits of a multilateral Defence bank and I was pleased to have an bank and I was pleased to have an ex-officer with me and I think we could have a multilateral defence could have a multilateral defence bank at the heart of any pact with Europe and I think it would be the most transformative lever government could pull for security, as thing as an industrial deterrent to Russia and I welcome my honourable friend to think about that heading into next week.

The final topic that I wish to touch on is holidays. Over the next few months, hard-working families across the country will seek some hard earned summer sun. Since leaving the EU, many of us have experienced huge queues at foreign airports and been envious as others pass straight through. I would welcome, if, as a small gesture, we could look at a new arrangement with the EU to ease airport congestion. We have three minutes. He might not want to give back to the grafters of the country but I think we should help hard- working British people get straight through the gates and straight to their sunbeds.

Could we have some cooperation on airport congestion with the EU? This is about living on, securing the future, like we have done, pragmatically, with India and the US lately.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Next week the EU and UK will be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Next week the EU and UK will be looking to change the post-Brexit looking to change the post-Brexit relationship but forgive me for my debts, I've learned two lessons from my miserable direct experience of how Labour operates. First, do not how Labour operates. First, do not trust the premise. Between 2017-19, trust the premise. Between 2017-19, I watched, as others did, the then- shadow Brexit secretary twist every shadow Brexit secretary twist every Parliamentary rule to block what people had voted for.

It was people had voted for. It was sabotaged. He connived to empower Brussels in a way that directly and Brussels in a way that directly and actively undermined the national negotiating position. He was not alone in this endeavour but the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

spectacle disgraced this House. I respectfully suggest that the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I respectfully suggest that the honourable lady is careful with the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

language she chooses to use about the Prime Minister. I was doubly careful to adhere to the rules of the House I hope that intent was clear. I don't think that the Prime Minister is a street dealer and he says what suits him and poses as a man of decency.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I would like the on ability to suggest if she will accuse her

**** Possible New Speaker ****

comment as she has accused the Prime Minister of not being straight. If that is outside the boundaries

**** Possible New Speaker ****

If that is outside the boundaries of what is acceptable, I will withdraw the common. When Labour negotiates, my second lesson, Britain loses and the student with the Chagos Islands and the battles the Chagos Islands and the battles the Chagos Islands and the battles with the unions. -- We have seen it. Labour thinks signing a deal is the Labour thinks signing a deal is the same as securing a good one but it is not and that will come clear. Brexit was never a rejection of
18:06
Julia Lopez Portrait Julia Lopez MP (Hornchurch and Upminster, Conservative)
-
-
Brexit was never a rejection of Europe and its people but a demand for democratic control over laws,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

borders, trade, our future. The honourable Libby is a great fan of honesty so I expect an honest fan of honesty so I expect an honest answer and Brexit replaced the circular flow of people with a one- circular flow of people with a one- way flow so does she think Brexit increased or decreased migration

**** Possible New Speaker ****

into the country? It allowed us to introduce a points-based system and we did that points-based system and we did that and I accept that mistakes were made in the introduction of the system in the introduction of the system and we can choose not to accommodate the needs of the economy and the people that it represents. The British people could feel the world changing around them and they knew changing around them and they knew instinctively that the UK needed to instinctively that the UK needed to be more nimble, fast, and to look at the movement of people and with businesses.

Do not let it be said businesses. Do not let it be said that there are no benefits. It's not true. We no longer hand £11-12 billion to Brussels for trade deals. We have secured money from the group of nations and regardless of what you think of the Parafield, we do not pay the same prohibitive taxes as the EU and we are setting our own standard in areas like AI and these are real opportunities for a modern, outward-facing Britain.

At the summit next week and ease the friction, that is all well and good and I want what works for British people but I'm worried that Labour just once a deal and does not grasp of what the EU will want in return and I'm worried that they think slick communication matters more than the needs of the people and so the youth mobility scheme might sound harmless but let's not be naive and let's not have partial free movement by stealth.

Also, One Defence, on the regulation, no dynamic element, and I'm fascinated the Minister refuses to say more on that. Lula could simply video back to the House to vote on it. -- Labour.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We are here to look forward to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We are here to look forward to the summit next week, not of the past but I feel like I've gone back 10 years in history with into the debate today. Moving forward, it's debate today. Moving forward, it's important that we all do whatever we can to make the lives of those across UK better and that is our job and even though the right honourable member who is no longer in his place would not like to agree, times change and opinions change. We know
18:09
18:12
Kieran Mullan Portrait Dr Kieran Mullan MP (Bexhill and Battle, Conservative)
-
-
I am grateful to speak ahead of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am grateful to speak ahead of I continue to believe in Brexit. At its core, it was a vote for national its core, it was a vote for national sovereignty and it was against government for bureaucrats. I believe strongly in international believe strongly in international cooperation and my experience is it gets worse and is riddled with compromises that do not satisfy the basic. I continue to believe the UK basic. I continue to believe the UK and its people deciding its own future and not locked into bureaucracy is the best future for bureaucracy is the best future for us because behind the careful language about resets, there is an inescapable truth that the inescapable truth that the government is taking the first steps to betraying the promise of Brexit.

Is it any surprise they are led by a Is it any surprise they are led by a man who campaigned for the leadership on the basis of restoring freedom of movement. If goes Brexit 40 times and we are not prepared to watch this train wreck in silence. I raised two issues that had been raised by others in the House. The issue of youth mobility schemes and the fundamental issues that made freedom of movement so unpopular and the benevolent economic disparity across EU member states is fundamentally incompatible with a scheme that would be a route for mass migration at a time when the government tells us they want to drive it down.

There can be no dynamic rule taking on oversight, any agreement and for standards, services must not come at the price automatically and we did not leave the EU for this. We must amount dispute resolution and independent recognition and that would reflect mutual respect. It is not mutual respect. It is not unreasonable and as with any state would expect. The UK has voted for this. Is it any wonder they are looking for international answers when the domestic picture includes restricted movement, Hamling working families with job-destroying taxes, and we must not allow this to be a distraction from domestic failure.

We will not allow Wippa to return -- Labour to do this. We will not allow Brussels to disguise control as cooperation that the democratic choice of the UK will be eroded. Brexit was a pivot, an opportunity, and I believe the benefits will be there for decades to come. They might be able to hide their intentions to speak but they will not be able to for years to come.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

With regret, it may not be possible for all members to speak in this debate, even with the time

**** Possible New Speaker ****

limit. No one more than me representing

**** Possible New Speaker ****

No one more than me representing Northern Ireland which is for a proper reset of the relationship of proper reset of the relationship of Europe. But, to be a proper reset, Europe. But, to be a proper reset, it must acknowledge and respect the fundamental concept of international fundamental concept of international agreements and that is this, the agreeing parties each give respect agreeing parties each give respect to the territorial integrity of each to the territorial integrity of each other and that is the fundamental failing of the present arrangements.

There is not and there was not required from the last government territorial integrity to be territorial integrity to be respected for the UK and that is how and why it came to be that in my and why it came to be that in my part of the UK, in 300 areas of law, we are subject not to the laws of this House but the laws of a foreign Parliament. The EU insisted and the British Government accepted that Northern Ireland should be under their customs code which treats Great Britain as a foreign country and Northern Ireland as EU territory and that we should be in the single market, subject to all of their laws.

In that, we have the most dramatic refusal and repudiation of that fundamental concept of mutual acknowledgement of territorial
18:17
18:17
18:17
Jim Allister Portrait Jim Allister KC MP (North Antrim, Traditional Unionist Voice)
-
-
never have a fair deal with Europe and that is what I would dearly like and that is what I would dearly like And therefore when I hear talk about dynamic alignment, it is not academic for me. We experience it every day of the week. And we experience the indignity of being experience the indignity of being subject to laws we do not make and cannot change. We are subject to the cannot change. We are subject to the indignity of the other part of the United Kingdom being described as a foreign country whose goods must be foreign country whose goods must be checked coming through an checked coming through an international EU Customs border, so if the Government is going to do an if the Government is going to do an SBS deal with Europe then it inevitably follows, as it has in Northern Ireland, that it will be submitting itself under the yoke of dynamic alignment with EU rules.

That is the price that the EU extracted for Northern Ireland. It is the price that it will extract for an SBS deal with Great Britain, and therefore that is not the way forward. The way forward is to retrieve sovereignty overall of this country and to achieve respect for territorial impact.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, it made in my role as the vice Chair of the EU Parliamentary partnership assembly I asked for the delegation which headed out to Brussels the assembly meeting head of the Senate meeting. meeting head of the Senate meeting. meeting head of the Senate meeting. Whilst it was a affair, I came away with great concerns about the tone of the conversations and contributions made by members of the benches opposite. Because whilst the Prime Minister is on record as saying as part of his alliance that there would be no return to freedom of movement and no rejoining of the customs union or the single market, customs union or the single market, they did not allow this in the committee to be published.

It was said it was implicit, but if that is true, surely it is not controversial true, surely it is not controversial to include as a statement of fact. So, the tone of the conversation and So, the tone of the conversation and the debates indicated a different direction. The red line seemed to be direction. The red line seemed to be drawn in disappearing ink. And it very much felt like the leadership and the members were singing from different hymn sheets, or perhaps that members belie the government's true intentions.

But if that is the case then the Government should be much clearer with the British public and those in this House about what it is trying to achieve. Going into the summit, the conspiracy of silence cannot continue. Brexit, at its heart, was about restoring
18:20
Sarah Bool Portrait Sarah Bool MP (South Northamptonshire, Conservative)
-
-
powers to Britain and allowing us sovereignty, but, despite the sovereignty, but, despite the results of the referendum, the goal and the members opposite seems to be and the members opposite seems to be getting ever closer again. Talk of youth opportunity seems innocuous, youth opportunity seems innocuous, but they must explain their terms and be realistic about what that would mean in terms of opening up would mean in terms of opening up free movement of peoples between the UK and the European Union by the back door.

We also have to be alert to the trade-offs in this debate. To to the trade-offs in this debate. To secure the veterinary agreement I secure the veterinary agreement I fear that we will concede to the dynamic alignment and the Minister has another opportunity, if he so wishes, to intervene about silence wishes, to intervene about silence once again. I also fear that our fisheries may be the next sacrificial lamb. Fisheries which were not mentioned once in the were not mentioned once in the Labour manifesto.

Now, in the recommendation from the PPA, which serves as a centre on the whole it says in regards to this that the says in regards to this that the assembly would provide a signal on or before the summit that a fair deal on fisheries would be reached, building our current arrangements, but what does a fair deal mean to this Government? If the French insist on a multi-year agreement which naturally shifts the favour to their industry as a grands forgetting the agreement and our Government concedes then this will be another community harmed by this Government.

First they attack our farmers, now our fisheries. At the meeting, members said that everyone should be clear that this Labour Government was clear in its ambition to reset the relationship with the EU, but a word of warning. We must not betray our fishermen and risk

**** Possible New Speaker ****

our food security in doing so. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. There are so many aspects of this Brexit renegotiation that the Brexit renegotiation that the Government is entering into that I Government is entering into that I could write and speak about and indeed we have heard in lot about those issues spoken about Honourable
18:21
Joe Robertson Portrait Joe Robertson MP (Isle of Wight East, Conservative)
-
-
those issues spoken about Honourable Members and particularly on this side of the chamber, but the issue I want to talk about is fishing and farming. It is always a worry when this Government goes in to that for a negotiation because when Labour negotiate Britain, invariably, loses. The current agreements with the EU over our fisheries should be a baseline, preferably a springboard that if the Government is going to renegotiate it improves on that deal, that was always the intention.

What is a negotiation if you go into it with a mind to sell out and come away with a worse deal. That is what is on the mind of UK fishing communities right now. And when my honourable friend the Member for Chester South and Eddisbury asked the Prime Minister to rule out giving away sovereign British waters to the EU, only last week, he refused to do so. The Minister can intervene on my to give that reassurance to our communities, our fishing communities today, that the Government will not sell out to the EU on our sovereign waters.

We know what the French want. The French want to send their trawlers closer ensure to our fishing waters in order to catch fish from UK waters and then take them back to the EU and sell them. But we are already in a situation where Dutch trawlers travel up and down the English channel. These are 4,000 ton vessels trawling the bottom of the ocean with a huge catch of fish like bus right in front of small British vessels like those fishing out of the Isle of Wight where my constituency is.

You have a set of rules that restrict the bass catch while having to watch Dutch boats string them by accident and take them home. So, if the Government is going to enter into a negotiation it cannot arrange with the fishermen it must be able. They missed go and improve on the deal and they must absolutely rule out any concessions to the EU on sovereignty over

**** Possible New Speaker ****

British territorial waters. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I welcome the Government today in negotiating a closer trading relationship with the union. I wish relationship with the union. I wish the Minister well, that given this record of negotiating international arrangements, I do worry about what the Prime Minister will agree on our
18:24
Ashley Fox Portrait Sir Ashley Fox MP (Bridgwater, Conservative)
-
-
the Prime Minister will agree on our behalf. We have seen this weakness in the negotiations on the chamber. The Government intends to give away the sovereignty of the territory we already own, and then pay billions of pounds. I can assure the Minister that when it comes to negotiating the details for the European he will find that we are a great deal tougher to deal with than the Government of Mauritius. The Government says that the agreement will improve growth in our economy, and that is commendable.

On this side we would take that assurance far more seriously if the Government had not spent the last time making this more difficult for British tenants. The Employment Rights Bill will increase costs to businesses by £5 million per year, or, mostly, by small and medium-sized enterprises. And the £25 million jobs tax will make it more expensive to employ people. Unless, of course, you are an Indian business, importing workers from India then you will benefit from a new trade deal negotiated by the Secretary of State for and trade.

A closer trading negotiation with the EU would be very welcome. Trade frictions could be managed easily. If we looked at sanitary measures, and agreement on that could be agreed by the EU and the UK could recognise each other's standards. Standards are already the same, or higher, than the EU, and the EU knows this. We also know the EU has no intention of doing this. It intends to wait until the UK has a Government that will agree to their rules.

And then agree to the dynamic alignment of those rules, and then agree in the Court of Justice with the European Union as the final arbiter of those rules. And it would seem that there patience has been rewarded because when I asked the Minister earlier in the debate clarify what approach he intended to take, the answer was there was none. It is clear the Government intends to sign as up to the EU over which this House will have no say on the rules and when the rules are changed by the EU Britain will simply have two follow.

And I agree with my right honourable friend that this is the beginning of a process to bring the United Kingdom under regulatory control of the EU. And thereafter, perhaps, an attempt by the party opposite to attempt by the party opposite to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

make us join the EU. Thank you. I do call James Wild. Thank you very much. There has been an astonishing lock of been an astonishing lock of transparency about the Government and the deal they are set to agree next week and that was personified by the ringmaster general who refused to engage in any of the substandard issues and the briefing suggests there deciding a deal putting the EU back into the EU's regulatory and political orbit. And anyone listening to the base will have heard Ministers repeatedly refuse to deny that the Government
18:27
James Wild Portrait James Wild MP (North West Norfolk, Conservative)
-
-
refuse to deny that the Government is preparing to make the UK April take out once again. And one of the frustrations when we are negotiating the trade operation agreement was that the EU refused to back bench agreement based on regulatory equivalents. Given our record and our commitment to high standards, this was clearly the common sense approach that the EU simply refuse to engage and instead impose higher costs and regulation falling on businesses and consumers. And now, extraordinarily, it seems that this Government is going to roll over and concede that the EU will have to follow the EU rules in which it has no say and also bring back ECG jurisdiction.

This is necessary, desire, or consistent with the democratic vote to leave the EU and restore our sovereignty and let's see if the Minister will point out see if the Minister will point out when he speaks. Having spent three years advising the Defence Secretary I am concerned with the approach of Government looking to take on defence and security. NATO is the cornerstone of this and the alliance should be our focus, yet a leak reveals that it will pull them into the EU security policy duplicating many of the functions and use of NATO and for what? It does not guarantee access to the rearmament fund, instead that would be subject as a feature to separate negotiations where the UK will have to pay, how much is completely unclear.

Given that some in the EU want to link access to defence programs and, once again, the Government has simply rolled over. But I know from my time and the Cabinet Office and working on these issues that the EU were determined to be inflexible from the start, Michelle Barnier, the negotiator. And unlike the man from Del Monte who delighted in seeing no, there are improvements to the CCE to be made. And the greater provide for that deliberately in the mechanism and their easement can easily agree to get trade flowing and benefiting business and consumers.

But instead of pursuing that from a position of principle this is negotiating a backroom deal accepted so badly and undermined our national interest.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. May I start by paying

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. May I start by paying a small tribute? Because, just last week, they passed secondary legislation made possible by this legislation made possible by this side of the House is groundbreaking precision breeding act 2023 that will mean more resilient crops, further food choices, and enhance our food security. Because although it may pain some on the Government benches, they have to admit they are making some use of the hard-won making some use of the hard-won Brexit freedom secured by these benches.

Why would we give those
18:30
18:31
18:31
Jack Rankin Portrait Jack Rankin MP (Windsor, Conservative)
-
-
focused on technology, productivity, and the future looks like. And in doing so we have got a head start on the continent which is now fumbling to produce regulation on its own in this area. We should be going this area. We should be going further still. Gene editing has the power to reduce the impact of animal power to reduce the impact of animal disease and stock pathogens in their tracks. Researchers at Imperial College London and Edinburgh are now close to making breakthroughs resistant poultry using gene resistant poultry using gene The government is to introduce secondary legislation for animals as it has done with plants.

The students in my constituency were students in my constituency were doing incredible things when I visited and when they make visited and when they make breakthroughs the framework should allow us to nimbly make use of them. With the recent, the government With the recent, the government With the recent, the government could kill the progress with the agreement they are negotiating. Companies at the forefront of the agricultural agency have raised concerns about the reset and the depot -- DEFRA committee and will have done the same.

This is competitive USB for British agriculture. Reports suggest the government will concede concessions to give them more bartering power on other issues and set a precedent for the wider relationship with the EU. Bending over backwards for an establishment the British people voted to reject. We have no power to influence the rules that would be fun. There were good reasons to leave the EU and good reasons to stay. There is no good reason to leave and opt in to the rules under which you have no say.

That is the worst of both worlds. If we go to the Switzerland agreement, they must align with all the food safety demands and replicate any further regulatory changes made in the future. This agreement may be in the best interests of the Swiss it would not work for Britain and every time you want to diverge in a way to benefit Britain, would have to supplicate Brussels. We all know what happens when the Prime Minister negotiates. When Labour negotiates, Britain loses.

A reset deal with the SPS agreement would be shortsighted. It might offer a quick boost in the near term but would take the wind near term but would take the wind from the sales of long-term investment flowing in. We have got to maintain competitive advantage to supercharge investment in areas like the Thames Valley where we have a world leading life sciences Centre. I warned the government not to change -- chain Britain to this regulation. Especially when the legislation on precision breathing last week was a clear example of last week was a clear example of what regulatory autonomy for an innovative UK could do for us.
18:33
Liz Jarvis Portrait Liz Jarvis MP (Eastleigh, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
I call Liz Jarvis.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Am grateful to contribute to this debate and highlight the impact of the botched Brexit deal on my constituents including pharmacies and the local hospitality industry. A local businessman has raised concerns over the additional costs and regulatory requirements that their business faces when trading with the EU. They exported a small volume of products to a customer in volume of products to a customer in France, worth about £5000, but when the export licences and transport were factored in, that came to an were factored in, that came to an additional £2500.

It's not a sustainable way to trade. I hope the Minister will give these important Minister will give these important matters consideration and raised these issues next week and give my constituents some reassurance it constituents some reassurance it will be looked at. We cannot ignore the opportunities that we take away from young people with no good reason that are of no benefit to anyone. I've listened to arguments from the party to my right but I cannot understand why anyone would want to stop young people from experiencing all that the world has to offer.

I hope the Minister will agree with me that giving young people, including people from disadvantaged backgrounds, the opportunity and freedom to live, study and work in Europe with the youth mobility scheme will be hugely beneficial to them and to the country. We must also recognise the negative impact Brexit has had on the creative sector and we need urgent action to ensure British artist can showcase talent without excessive red tape. The Liberal Democrats have set out a clear roadmap to reset relations and we must start by restoring trust, rebuilding cooperation in key areas like research, climate policy, and removing the barriers that have been strangling our economy.

It is time to take meaningful steps to repair the relationship with Europe and restore the prosperity that the country desperately needs. I sincerely hope the government will use the UK-EU summit to turn the page on the chaos of the last five

**** Possible New Speaker ****

years. The people of Wales have been let down by those who promised Brexit would lead to a brighter future but it has caused huge damage to our it has caused huge damage to our communities. The hard Brexit has cost the Welsh economy £4 billion,
18:36
Llinos Medi Portrait Llinos Medi MP (Ynys Môn, Plaid Cymru)
-
-
cost the Welsh economy £4 billion, reducing the value of exports by up to £1.1 billion. The post-Brexit trade deals such as with New Zealand and Australia have been unavailable for the Welsh agricultural and manufacturing sectors. Wales has lost out on £1 billion of the European structural and development funding which could have been used to support deprived communities. This was despite the promise made by the then-Conservative UK government in 2019 two, at a minimum, match the size of former EU funding in Wales and in nations across the UK.

In my constituency, a vital port for trade, there has been dramatic falls in traffic since Brexit. I know that following the culture of the port after the storm last year, the value of trade going through Holyhead has dropped by £500 million. At the time, I hope there would be a hardship fund to help the stance is affected by the closure of the port. I hope I can urge the government to make a clear commitment to safeguarding the port against future crises, given the strategic importance.

We need a relationship with Europe that works for Wales and the opportunity to improve relations and the upcoming UK-EU Summit is welcome. Given this situation, is crucial be make trading between Wales and England easier. I've seen challenges exporters have faith in my own constituency with local businesses telling me they have struggled to export under the post- Brexit system and with agreements coming to the cost and the government should create a youth mobility scheme and join it to Erasmus, so our children can study and work abroad.

Also did cooperation on the environment, the arts, Defence, and I hope the summit arts, Defence, and I hope the summit next week will be the start, not the end, of strengthening ties with Europe. The government has said the first mission is to grow the economy and I see no better opportunity to improve growth by committing to the UK and committing to the long-term goal of joining the single market and the customs union. Wales has suffered by those who have championed false promises and the government must take action to fix the damaged relationship and fix the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Welsh economy. I call the shadow minister of.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I call the shadow minister of. We have had a strong debate here

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We have had a strong debate here this afternoon and we have had many contributions on both sides. I would like to thank so many of my honourable and right honourable honourable and right honourable honourable and right honourable friend and the honourable members for south Holland, North Essex, Hornchurch, South Northamptonshire, Bridgwater, and Windsor. What a fantastic set of knowledgeable contributions and real concern about contributions and real concern about the impending EU summit. It is the
18:40
Andrew Griffith Portrait Andrew Griffith MP (Arundel and South Downs, Conservative)
-
-
the impending EU summit. It is the spirit of such rigourous debate that this House finds strengths and purpose. It has taken less than a year and since the general election the economy has been tanked and British business has been crushed and we have seen 100,000 fewer people in employment. Wealth creators have been driven overseas at the rate of 1 million every 45 minutes and they have shattered any signs of economic growth. I'm afraid to say the next item on this bleak to say the next item on this bleak agenda of decline is betraying the people who voted to leave the political union with the EU.

This should come as no surprise to anyone. Those on the benches opposite, and some of those on the benches to the left of me, voted against Brexit on no less than 48 different occasions and if this debate is reminiscent of the past, that is precisely why some members wish to take us back there. Every since being seduced by the European socialist, their hearts have never been in the mission of taking back control of our laws and the 'EU surrender some' next Monday, it formally marks the start of the Labour plan to dismantle the powers, not just of the government, but this House, to push us back into the European Union as a passive rule ticker.

We on these benches ask to what end. Why is the government capitulating the very same hardfought Brexit freedoms which permitted the signing of two trade agreements, notwithstanding the limited scope, in the last seven days. Had we followed the policies Labour are advocating for an Opposition, this government would never have reached an agreement with the USA or India. They would not even have been in the room. They would have been resorting to one of 28 member nations and asking, begging Ursula von der Leyen to consider putting British interests first.

We were right not to follow the advice then and they be right to listen to our advice now. Yet, it appears that they still have not learnt and as we have heard from many speakers this afternoon, the opportunities of the future are for those states who are agile. AI, genomics, space, creative industries, financial services, life sciences. The country already has a good deal with the EU. We have a mutually advantageous zero tariff agreement, valued at £184 billion in services and £174 billion in goods.

Nothing is perfect and where there are sensible measures such as pursuing opportunities for mutual recognition, that should be explored. For example, one of the biggest frictions businesses face biggest frictions businesses face today is the denial of the use of E gates which was imposed by the EU out of spite. No such smallmindedness from us. But the problem that we face today is that the government has failed to come to this House and explain exactly or at all what the Prime Minister's EU reset will look like.

We have seen nothing on their negotiating objectives, the red lines, the supposed benefits, and impact assessment, or even an interim update. I know and understand that of course there will be finer negotiating details that the government would want to share but that is very different. -- Won't want to share. That is very different from feeling nothing and is disrespectful of Parliament and foresees the House to rely on leaks and to read between the lines of Downing Street press handouts.

If the leaks were to be believed, we know that Labour is planning on signing up the British Armed Forces to an EU army and binding strategic military decision-making powers to bureaucrats in Brussels. When it comes to... The Minister will be happy to rule these things out. Perhaps he will be more forthcoming than the Paymaster General earlier. It comes to security, there is no bigger challenge than our borders. I think even the Prime Minister on Monday recognised that. The UK's request for shared access to a joint illegal migrant database has already been rejected by the EU.

So much for cooperation on security. Defence procurement must never be paid to play and I have no idea why the EU member nations would cut themselves off from the UK's excellent Defence primes unless this is once again a protectionist industrial policy cloak. What twisted dealmaking trades fishing rights to the French in working more closely together, as we have so many times on your's Defence. We want Labour would betray fishermen and they have proven us right by putting the fishing rights Might I think the shadow minister for given way and on betraying our fishermen I wonder if the Mr Wood take the opportunity today to deny my desecration that they are about to agree to agreement with our fishermen in one single yet the attack have single year agreements.

Can he rule that out to me today?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am afraid, I mean I am afraid he is as talkative as a haddock when it comes to clarifying his objectives, but perhaps he will objectives, but perhaps he will confound our expectations as he sums up. But just as the Prime Minister pretends to talk tough on immigration, by the same token he immigration, by the same token he plans to open our borders to an EU youth mobility scheme. Perhaps the Frontbench will deny this. That Frontbench will deny this.

That could be millions from below into Bucharest. Limited volume schemes with comparable economies where the with comparable economies where the UK gets to decide who comes here are fine in principle. We have such a fine in principle. We have such a scheme with Australia, but Australia is 10,000 miles away, and a very is 10,000 miles away, and a very different type of economy. The wrong different type of economy. The wrong type of youth mobility scheme would disadvantage young British workers who are, already, thanks to this movement, struggling to get their movement, struggling to get their foot on the ladder for a job.

Again, unemployment up today. Or able to secure a roof over their head in Britain's housing market. And what part of the government's objective is to make it harder for our young people? What we do see is the Government proceeding at breakneck pace with product regulation and meteorology bill. Beware of bills with boring sounding names. That is a Trojan horse giving Ministers the power to roll back Brexit, sinus up to EU rules and abandon Imperial measurements offer good at the stroke of a pin, unchecked stroke of a pin, unchecked ministerial power to the rule taker of Brussels to detach.

Let me be clear, the Conservatives are certainly not opposed to cooperation as one amongst many other markets. That one should be obvious from the hardfought trade agreement which we obtained after the last Government, but we must not, under any circumstances, surrender our Brexit freedoms so the Prime Minister can reassure his next law school reunion that he has undermined our sovereignty. After the earlier equivocation by the master general gave the Minister today a final chance, they have been chuntering all afternoon, this is a final chance to answer these questions once and for all.

Can he reassure that the millions of people who voted to leave the EU that his surrender summit will not betray their wishes? Will he confirm that we know backsliding on free movement or compulsory asylum transfers? Can he reassure taxpayers, or perhaps those who have lost their winter allowance, or whose benefits are set to be cut, that the UK will not be agreeing any new payments or money to the EU? Is he able to confirm to the benefit of our coastal communities there will be no concessions on fishing rights? Can he assure the House there will be no rule taking, dynamic alignment, or extension of European jurisdiction? And will he pledge indeed as well as words there will be no compromise on the privacy of NATO as a successful cornerstone of European security.

Because if he is not able to provide those assurances, then this Government is betraying Brexit. All of the evidence we have seen today suggests that Labour are limbering up for a summit to damage Britain's interests. There determined to deal away our hardfought freedoms, lose control of our borders, our laws, our fish and our Armed Forces. I urge the Minister could come clean in his windup and have the honest to explain to the House by Labour are preparing to surrender the right for British people to choose their own destiny, and we know because when

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Labour negotiates Britain loses. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am forgetful to have the chance to I am forgetful to have the chance to respond to the debate this afternoon. And I did not know that there were so many fans across the House. It was a favourite show of
18:50
Stephen Doughty Portrait Stephen Doughty MP, Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) (Cardiff South and Penarth, Labour )
-
-
House. It was a favourite show of mind and I was younger and of course fans of the show will know that some ticket was advised by a hologram, Al, a US Admiral who would come in and give good advice on how to get your challenges, and instead we have had the spectre of Sir Bill Cash come in by text to members on the other side. Who would have thought? It literally was a journey back to the past and I think that has been the biggest contrast, that on this side of the House we have had people and a Government who want to take this Government forwards, not back.

A stark contrast to the other side who seem stuck in the last decade. And, of course, that also means we will not be rejoining the EU or the single market, the customs union, returning to freedom of movement. But what we do look forward to is to coming presidents to London next week for the first-ever UK-EU Summit, the first of the annual summits to take place between the UK and the EU. And it was the Leader of the Opposition who recently said we announced that we would leave the European Union before we had a plan for growth outside the EU.

Those mistakes were made because we told people what they wanted to hear first, and then tried to work it out later, and of course the lesson we have learned that the party opposite might want to pay careful attention, I might not give way right now, that failing to plan is, inevitably, planning to fail. And this Government will not take the same reckless, chaotic, and dogmatic approach when it comes to the British people and our national interest. That is why the leadership of our Prime Minister this was elected on change and that is what we are delivering and we will be setting our relations with EU partners and, indeed, our wider European partners and using those relationships to deliver growth, prosperity, safety, and security.

Myself and general, Prime Minister, Foreign Secretary, have been working to do that and just this week we of course hosted the follow-up plus foreign Ministers on Ukraine. We have had high-level engagement with many European leaders. We have been travelling around the constant driving forward growth and migration. Driving forward relationships for our security and our defence. And we are also setting up structures to ensure European partnerships deliver in the long- term and this includes treaties or leaders into some of our closest partners such as France, Germany, Poland, and not to mention of course the very exciting and successful inviting his Majesty the King to Italy last month.

And also I am delighted that Buckingham Palace today have announced that President Macron accompanied by Mrs Macron have accepted an invitation from his Majesty to pay a state visit to the UK and the Prime Minister will hold the next summit during the next state visit. And increasingly we have already developed it results for the UK, £250 million in cheque investment Rolls-Royce small nuclear reactors, modular reactors, 6 million in Polish logistics company, they are doubling their investment to ScottishPower over the next four years.

On security, new defence agreements with Germany and Romania, new negotiations on defence agreements with Poland and Norway. Our migration and joint action plan with Germany and migration deals with Serbia, Kosovo, Slovenia and Slovakia. We have also agreed new measures to tackle smuggling gangs with friends. On energy and climate and new civil nuclear operation with the UK and Finland and other European countries are responding positively to that. And, crucially, on security and defence, they want some answers to the questions they have asked.

They want some answers, I will give them some answers, but I will happily take some interventions. On foreign security and defence, let me be absolutely clear, NATO is and remains the bedrock of our security and alliances but there are many strands to take that and whether it is our bilateral security and defence partnerships, whether it is our work through other European bodies to our work in the Western Balkans or, indeed, through a new UK and EU security and defence partnership, a security and defence partnership, a muscle gets stronger when its muscles strands are flexed.

These are not in contradiction to each other, though strengthening the country and strengthening our place in the will, delivering on defence, technology, jobs, industry, and job

**** Possible New Speaker ****

security and I will happily give way to the right honourable gentleman. I am grateful to the honourable gentleman and I just simply ask a gentleman and I just simply ask a very simple question. The Government has constantly said they will not reach their red lines. They have said that publicly in Europe and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

said that publicly in Europe and they have said it here .my question is the dynamic alignment one of the red lines? I will come onto that in a moment, but we are absolutely clear moment, but we are absolutely clear and I have been clear that I will come in to answer that question specifically in a moment, but can I just say that talking down Britain's just say that talking down Britain's role when we have shown such leadership is quite rightly leadership is quite rightly irresponsible and I will not take lessons on NATO or European defence or security or the difference of security in this country from a party that ruled the British Army to the smallest size since the Napoleonic era and we made the tough choices to invest in defence.

And let me be absolutely clear there was no suggestion that the UK was ever no suggestion that the UK was ever joining the European army and no forward proposal for that has ever been put forward and if we answer questions in this earlier on we absolutely will stand with the sovereignty of Gibraltar in the importance of our military base there. I spoke to them on that matter and it is hugely helpful to have such widely wild spec collision that is being put about an fisheries we should be clear that of Costa was a Brexit deal negotiated by the last Government and we are looking for arrangement that is beneficial for our fisheries and coastal amendments and I am trying to get into a running commentary.

On SBS, the for the right honourable gentleman, let's be clear since 2018 the U.K.'s trade with the EU has fallen by 20% for exports and 11% for imports after witnessing trade inflation, so it is both sides interest to seek the agreement that remove those barriers to trade. We are not interested in divergence for divergence sake or a race to the bottom on standards. We are getting to a running commentary on this. We will be absolutely clear, and of course needs to be appropriate dispute resolution mechanisms and,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

similarly, Madam Deputy Speaker, they ask questions. Order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order. The asked questions they do not want to hear the answers to. We are absolutely clear we are taking serious actions to reduce this but serious actions to reduce this but we support control schemes and create opportunities for young people to experience different people to experience different cultures, travel, and work. The row cottoned questions raised about issues such as hanging Euro issues such as hanging Euro Mediterranean invention and it is responsible will look at that responsible will look at that ensuring any final decisions are made in the national interest, but I want to address a very fundamental want to address a very fundamental point.

This absolutely absurd idea point. This absolutely absurd idea of surrender is talking Britain down. In fact, what we see is down. In fact, what we see is strength. We see strength from this. Strength from this Government. In a Strength from this Government. In a world of turmoil, enabled of turmoil world of turmoil, enabled of turmoil and uncertainty, Madam Deputy Speaker, I have answered that question already. Madam Deputy

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Speaker. Order. The Minister will be heard. The Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

heard. The Minister. Thank you. I have been absolutely

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I have been absolutely clear. Surrender, nonsense. Instead, we see strength. Standing up for our steel uncommonly factors, delivering steel uncommonly factors, delivering trade deals in the US and India, investing in energy, leading Europe with our key allies in the defence of Ukraine, tackling Illegal of Ukraine, tackling Illegal Migration Act series organised crime and boosting funding and support for our national at the shameful disinvestment by the previous Government. That is talking down Government. That is talking down Britain and we are standing up for Britain.

Britain.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that the original words stand a part of the question. As many as are of that opinion, say, "Aye", Of the contrary, "No",
19:01
None Portrait Division
-

The The question The question is The question is as The question is as on The question is as on the The question is as on the order The question is as on the order paper. As many as are of that opinion, say, "Aye." To the contrary, "No." Tellers for the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Lock Lock the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, Order, order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, order. Order, order. The Order, order. The ayes Order, order. The ayes to Order, order. The ayes to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, order. The ayes to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, order. The ayes to the right, 104. The noes to the left,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

402. The ayes to the right, 104. The

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The ayes to the right, 104. The noes to the left, 402. The noes have noes to the left, 402. The noes have noes to the left, 402. The noes have Order. The question is that the proposed words be added. As many as of that opinion, say, "Aye." Of the of that opinion, say, "Aye." Of the country, say, "No." Division. Clear The question The question is The question is that The question is that the The question is that the proposed words be added.

As many as of that opinion, say, "Aye." Of the contrary, say, "No." Tellers for the contrary, say, "No." Tellers for the ayes, Vicky Foxcroft, and a, Richard

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Locked Locked the Locked the doors. Order, Order, order. Order, order. The Order, order. The "Ayes" Order, order. The "Ayes" to Order, order. The "Ayes" to the Order, order. The "Ayes" to the right, 321, The "Noes", 322.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The "Ayes" with 321, The "Noes"

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The "Ayes" with 321, The "Noes" with 102, so The "Ayes", have it. I declare the question as amended to declare the question as amended to be agreed to. Motion number three on be agreed to. Motion number three on medical device. The question is as on the order paper. As many as are on the order paper. As many as are of that opinion, say, "Content", Of the contrary, "No", I think The the contrary, "No", I think The "Ayes" have it.

The question is that this House do now adjourn. As many this House do now adjourn. As many as are of that opinion, say, "Aye",
19:32
19:32
None Portrait Division
-

19:32
19:32
19:33
19:33
19:35
19:35
19:36
19:36
19:36
None Portrait Q7. What diplomatic steps his Department is taking to support Ukraine. (904078)
-

19:36
19:37
19:37
19:37
19:39
19:39
19:40
19:40
19:41
19:41
19:42
19:42
None Portrait Q9. What progress he has made on ratifying the Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction. (904080)
-

19:42
19:43
19:43
19:43
19:45
19:45
19:46
19:46
19:46
19:46
19:47
19:47
19:47
19:48
19:48
None Portrait Q12. What steps his Department has taken to commemorate Victory in Europe Day. (904083)
-

19:48
19:48
19:49
19:49
19:51
19:51
19:51
19:52
19:52
None Portrait Q14. What recent progress he has made on helping to secure the release of Alaa Abd el-Fattah. (904085)
-

19:52
19:52
19:53
19:53
None Portrait Q15. What steps he is taking to prepare for the 2025 UN Ocean Conference. (904086)
-

19:53
19:53
19:54
19:54
None Portrait Topical questions: Foreign, Commonwealth and Development
-

19:54
19:56
19:56
19:56
19:56
19:57
19:57
19:58
19:58
19:59
19:59
19:59
20:00
20:00
20:00
20:01
20:01
20:01
This debate has concluded
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page