All 3 Debates between James Cleverly and Pat McFadden

Exiting the European Union

Debate between James Cleverly and Pat McFadden
Monday 20th May 2019

(4 years, 12 months ago)

Ministerial Corrections
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Pat McFadden Portrait Mr McFadden
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

17. How much Government Departments have spent on preparations for leaving the EU without a deal.

James Cleverly Portrait James Cleverly
- Hansard - -

Additional EU exit funding allocated by Her Majesty’s Treasury to Departments and devolved Administrations covers all scenarios. No-deal spending cannot readily be separated from deal spending, given the significant overlap in plans in many cases. Since 2016, the Treasury has allocated more than £2.4 billion of funding for all exit scenarios.

[Official Report, 16 May 2019, Vol. 660, c. 358.]

Letter of correction from the Under-Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, the hon. Member for Braintree (James Cleverly):

An error has been identified in my response to the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton South East (Mr McFadden).

The correct response should have been:

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between James Cleverly and Pat McFadden
Thursday 16th May 2019

(5 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Pat McFadden Portrait Mr Pat McFadden (Wolverhampton South East) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

17. How much Government Departments have spent on preparations for leaving the EU without a deal.

James Cleverly Portrait The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (James Cleverly)
- Hansard - -

Additional EU exit funding allocated by Her Majesty’s Treasury to Departments and devolved Administrations covers all scenarios. No-deal spending cannot readily be separated from deal spending, given the significant overlap in plans in many cases. Since 2016, the Treasury has allocated more than £2.4 billion of funding for all exit scenarios.[Official Report, 20 May 2019, Vol. 660, c. 6MC.]

Pat McFadden Portrait Mr McFadden
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Despite talking up and legitimising a no-deal outcome for two years, the Prime Minister applied for two different extensions to the article 50 period to avoid that outcome, because she knows it would be damaging to the country. The Minister talks of £2.4 billion. Would that money not have been better spent on the fight against knife crime, on helping families struggling to cope with universal credit or on 100 other causes that would benefit our constituents, rather than on an argument that, by the Prime Minister’s actions, she has shown she does not even believe in?

European Union Referendum Bill

Debate between James Cleverly and Pat McFadden
Tuesday 9th June 2015

(8 years, 11 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Pat McFadden Portrait Mr McFadden
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman is chairman of the group; I think it is reasonable to assume that he speaks for the group.

The Foreign Secretary, who is not exactly one of the leading Europhiles in the Government, made his view of that demand known within hours of the introductory article being printed:

“If you were talking about the House of Commons having a unilateral red card veto, that’s not achievable, that’s not negotiable because that would effectively be the end of the European Union.”[Interruption.]

Some Conservative Members may cheer that conclusion, but what is happening is that the Government are learning the meaning of the term “transitional demands”— demands that are made by those who know that they will not be met, as a pretext for saying that they have been betrayed and then campaigning for what they always wanted, which in this case is exit from the European Union. The new group calls itself Conservatives for Britain; they are, in fact, the desperate to be disappointed. This is the Prime Minister’s problem: there is nothing he can negotiate that will satisfy a significant proportion of his parliamentary party.

James Cleverly Portrait James Cleverly (Braintree) (Con)
- Hansard - -

Is not the position that the right hon. Gentleman is outlining that there is no conclusion to the EU negotiations that would make him willing to leave the EU?

Pat McFadden Portrait Mr McFadden
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman gets to the heart of the Conservatives’ negotiating stance. My answer to him is that holding a gun to our head and saying to our European allies, “Give us what we want or we’re going to shoot ourselves,” is not the only negotiating strategy available to the United Kingdom. Either the Prime Minister will cave in to his colleagues’ demands or, sooner or later, there must be a reckoning between the Prime Minister and those in his party who are determined to take Britain out of the European Union.

The Prime Minister will come back and claim victory. Like the emperor in the fairly tale, he will say, “Look at my wonderful new clothes.” Many of his Back Benchers will look at him with relief and loyalty, and say that he has got a good deal. However, we know that plenty of them will say that there is not a lot keeping him warm, and conclude that it is not enough.