All 3 Debates between Yvette Cooper and Oliver Letwin

Wed 3rd Apr 2019
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill
Commons Chamber

3rd reading: House of Commons & Report stage: House of Commons
Wed 13th Dec 2017
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill
Commons Chamber

Committee: 7th sitting: House of Commons

European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill

Debate between Yvette Cooper and Oliver Letwin
Oliver Letwin Portrait Sir Oliver Letwin
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Will the right hon. Lady give way?

Yvette Cooper Portrait Yvette Cooper
- Hansard - -

I will.

Oliver Letwin Portrait Sir Oliver Letwin
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I should have thought that my hon. Friend the Member for Stone (Sir William Cash) would recognise that that is a reference to the Act that the Bill will become should it pass into law.

Yvette Cooper Portrait Yvette Cooper
- Hansard - -

The right hon. Gentleman is exactly right. Let me clarify the position. There are two references to two different Acts. There is one reference in clause 1(2) to the 2019 Act that this Bill will become, and another reference in clause 2(1), to the Act passed last year.

European Union (Withdrawal) Act

Debate between Yvette Cooper and Oliver Letwin
Monday 25th March 2019

(5 years, 1 month ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Oliver Letwin Portrait Sir Oliver Letwin
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thoroughly agree with the hon. Gentleman. It is possible—and, above all, it should be possible for us at this juncture—to ensure that the neutrality of the process is guaranteed. Of course we will have conflicting views about the ideal outcome, but if we are to come together on an outcome that all of us can tolerate, and that will consequently achieve a sustainable majority, we will have to ensure that everybody recognises the process by which we get to it as being fair and neutral as between the various options.

--- Later in debate ---
Yvette Cooper Portrait Yvette Cooper
- Hansard - -

I thank the right hon. Gentleman. As he knows, I strongly support his amendment, and he is making an extremely important speech. Does he agree that, as the Government have effectively taken two years to get to this point, it is not unreasonable for the House, in this unusual and difficult situation, to recognise that it is likely to take us more than one day to attempt to do what the Government should have done quite a long time ago? Can I therefore urge him, when he is thinking about further steps, to highlight the importance of our identifying a further day next week when we can have similar debates and discussions if we need to, so that we can come to a conclusion? I also urge the Government to think about what they should be doing to provide for these further votes so that we can come to a consensus, and to recognise that there may need to be further binding votes in this process as well.

Oliver Letwin Portrait Sir Oliver Letwin
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Unsurprisingly, given the close co-operation that there has been between us, I entirely agree with everything that the right hon. Lady has just said. It is of the utmost importance that the business of the House motion on Wednesday should also provide for a further day, or days, in which to take forward the process that will begin on Wednesday so that it can reach a successful conclusion. We will also have to attend to the question that has been discussed this evening and that began to be aired when the Prime Minister was answering questions on her statement: what the Government will do if the House reaches a majority—not for some unicorn or some ludicrous proposition that utterly contradicts common sense, but for a sensible way forward—and how we will persuade the Government at that stage to allow that majority view to be implemented. That will be a major issue.

European Union (Withdrawal) Bill

Debate between Yvette Cooper and Oliver Letwin
Oliver Letwin Portrait Sir Oliver Letwin
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Please, allow me to continue. It is also perfectly possible, as the right hon. Member for Leeds Central knows, because he is a fine logician, for the other side in the EU negotiations to reject such alternative terms. We therefore hit the question that he cannot evade: under those circumstances, is he or is he not hoping—the Opposition spokesman made what he was hoping for perfectly clear—that Parliament will have the right to tell the Government that they cannot leave on terms that Parliament does not accept? I really think that that is important, if we are to be honest about this, because that is what the right hon. Gentleman and the Opposition spokesman are suggesting.

Yvette Cooper Portrait Yvette Cooper
- Hansard - -

rose

Oliver Letwin Portrait Sir Oliver Letwin
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I have no doubt that it is also what the right hon. Lady who is now seeking to catch my eye wishes to suggest. I will let her do so, and then I shall give way to my hon. Friend the Member for Chelmsford (Vicky Ford).

Yvette Cooper Portrait Yvette Cooper
- Hansard - -

The logic of the right hon. Gentleman’s position is that he wants to rule out any possibility for Parliament even to ask the Government to go back to the negotiating table. Of course he is right that, in the end, this is about a negotiation, and the 27 other European countries will have a view and such a negotiation will take place. The logic of his position, however, is that he wants to rule out any say for Parliament at all, or any attempt by Parliament to ask the Government to try to get a different or better deal, or to change the terms, and that makes absolutely no sense at all for anybody who believes in the role of Parliament.

Oliver Letwin Portrait Sir Oliver Letwin
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

First, the right hon. Lady has said nothing to contradict my point about what she and other Labour Members are arguing, and secondly, as a matter of fact, that is not a correct characterisation of my position. I am perfectly happy that Parliament should ask the Government, if there is time, to go back and reconsider the terms they are negotiating. I have no problem with that at all. The question is what happens if they cannot succeed in negotiating those terms and, in the end, we reach that crunch point.