Ministers from the Department for Exiting the European Union were
answering questions in the Commons. Subjects covered
included...
To read any of these in greater detail, please click on the link
above, or see below.
Marking Exit Day
(Warrington South) (Con)
1. What plans the Government have to mark the UK leaving the EU on
31 January 2020. [900000]
(Burton) (Con)
11. What plans the Government have to mark the UK leaving the EU
on 31 January 2020. [900011]
(Bolton North East)
(Con)
17. What plans the Government have to mark the UK leaving the EU
on 31 January 2020. [900017]
(Shrewsbury and Atcham)
(Con)
18. What plans the Government have to mark the UK leaving the EU
on 31 January 2020. [900018]
The Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union ()
I begin by congratulating my hon. Friend on his election to the
seat of Warrington South. I look forward to his advocacy on
issues relating to our exit from the European Union. We stand
ready to work with businesses up and down the country as we mark
an important moment in our national history: leaving the European
Union on 31 January.
How will my right hon. Friend ensure that small businesses, which
have been, and are, the engine of growth in my constituency, are
able to share in the benefits of leaving the EU and in
celebrating our departure on 31 January?
Before coming to the House, my hon. Friend was a champion of
small businesses in Warrington, and I know he will continue to be
so during his time in this place. The best way that we will
support businesses in his constituency is by having control of
our money, borders and laws. That is what our exit from the
European Union does, and that is what he should rightly celebrate
on 31 January.
Does my right hon. Friend agree that to mark our leaving the
European Union, our fantastic local breweries in Burton-on-Trent
should brew a celebratory Brexit beer?
Hon. Members
Hear, hear!
From the reaction of the House, it seems my hon. Friend has
struck an extremely positive note in one of her first
contributions. I again welcome her to the House. I know her
constituency is famed for its beer, and I am sure that many
Members would welcome those breweries celebrating this occasion
in such a way, just as I would welcome the fantastic Elgood’s
Brewery doing so, which sits in my constituency.
Will my right hon. Friend consider the idea, as a lot of my
constituents have, of commemorating this day of real
constitutional importance by having an anniversary on the date
every year?
I very much welcome my hon. Friend to his place, not least as a
fellow Lancastrian; I am sure Mr Speaker knows of our Lancastrian
pride. He brings an important suggestion. Again, it is all part
of marking this significant moment in our national history.
Will my right hon. Friend acknowledge that 31 January is a
significant day not only for us here in the United Kingdom but
for hundreds of millions of Eurosceptics across the continent of
Europe who share concerns about the direction of travel of the
European Union, including many citizens in my country of birth,
Poland? Does he agree that it is important for us to celebrate
this day very publicly, as a nation, to give a guiding principle
to others in Europe that there is life outside the European
Union?
My hon. Friend is right to draw attention to the fact that this
is an important day not just for our own citizens but for many
elsewhere who recognise the importance of this event in terms of
democracy and respecting the democratic decisions that people
take, rather than overturning them, as has sometimes been the
intention in the past. He has always been a champion of close
ties between the UK and Poland, and I think that whatever
celebrations there are will continue in that vein.
(Leeds Central) (Lab)
Do the Government’s plans for the end of this month still include
the abolition of the right hon. Gentleman’s Department? If so,
which Department and which Minister will take responsibility for
the very important negotiations that are about to begin?
I pay tribute to the work of the right hon. Gentleman during his
tenure as chair of the Exiting the European Union Committee. He
knows from his time in Government that machinery of government
changes are announced in the usual way by the Prime Minister, and
No. 10 has signalled that it intends to do so. He should also be
aware, because we publicly stated it, that the Department will
draw to a close to mark our exit. It is the Department for
Exiting the European Union, and we will have exited and done the
job of the Department when we leave on 31 January.
Mr (Huddersfield)
(Lab/Co-op)
I welcome the Secretary of State back to this House. We have
always got on very well, and he is much cleverer than me, but I
do have a couple of degrees in economics. When the President of
the European Commission comes here and says that in any deal, if
we do not have free movement of labour we will not get free
movement of goods and services, is that not something that we
should all be very sad about as we leave the European Union? I am
always grateful to the hon. Gentleman for how he champions his
constituents and raises thoughtful points. He is quite right to
pick up on what I thought was a constructive speech from the
European Commission President at the London School of Economics
yesterday and to draw the House’s attention to it. What I took
away from her speech was her language about wanting a very
ambitious partnership—she referred to
“old friends and new beginnings”
and drew on her own time in London and how much she enjoyed it
and valued the United Kingdom. She wanted to see a close
partnership, whether on climate change, security or many other
issues on which we have values in common with our neighbours.
(Glasgow North) (SNP)
Will the Government confirm whether they are going to request the
chiming of Big Ben to mark 11 pm on 31 January? This is not going
to be a moment of celebration for many people across the UK; it
will be a moment of considerable concern, not least for my
constituents who are European Union nationals. Perhaps we should
be asking the Government: if they do want to hear the bell chime,
for whom will the bell toll?
I welcome this late conversion on the part of the Scottish
National party to celebrating our exit and having Big Ben chime.
As the hon. Gentleman will know, a decision as to whether Big Ben
should bong or not is one for the House authorities and I would
not dare to step in to such terrain. The wider point, as I think
the mood of the House has demonstrated, is that this is an
historic moment and many Members of the House wish to celebrate
it.
(Cambridge) (Lab)
I urge the Government to be careful about the tone that is
adopted at the end of January. They will appreciate that there
are many who do not see this as a moment for celebration. In
particular, may I ask the Secretary of State what measures are
being put in place for the large numbers of non-UK EU nationals,
of whom there are many in Cambridgeshire, who will feel
particularly vulnerable at that point?
The hon. Member is absolutely right, and I hope that colleagues
across the House will see that I always try to take a tone that
reflects that. I have often talked about the fact that in my own
family, notwithstanding my personal role, my eldest brother is an
official working for a European institution. I know that many
families were split on this issue.
To answer the hon. Member’s question directly, one thing that we
have done is establish a £9 million fund to support outreach
groups and charities. We have worked with embassies in
particular. Within that £9 million, £1 million is specifically
for the settlement scheme, as I am sure the Minister for Security
detailed in Committee on Tuesday, and there have been 2.6 million
or 2.8 million or so applications, so the scheme is working very
effectively free of charge. But the hon. Member is right that
some people will have concerns, and one thing that the European
Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill does is guarantee the rights of
citizens and address many of the concerns that some of his
constituents have shared.
Sir (South Holland and The
Deepings) (Con)
In celebration of this important occasion in our nation’s
history, will the Secretary of State arrange for Union flags to
be flown from all public buildings across our kingdom? That would
be a fitting tribute to the decision the British people made to
leave the European Union. We will remain unafraid of our
patriotism, unabashed about our departure and unwavering in our
determination to make our future even greater.
I know that, like me, my parliamentary neighbour always takes
pride in seeing our Union Jack flown, and any opportunity to do
so is one that he and I would always celebrate. Given my right
hon. Friend’s penchant for poetry, I cannot be alone in thinking
that such an occasion might inspire him in due course to write
something fitting.
(Westmorland and Lonsdale)
(LD)
Even the most ardent supporter of Brexit will, I am sure, share a
concern that the UK’s departure from the European Union might be
depicted as representing insularity and nationalism. It is
therefore important that we dispel that sense, and one way in
which we could do so is to sign up long term to the vulnerable
refugees resettlement scheme and, indeed, to accept in full the
Dubs amendment and do our best by the most vulnerable people on
this planet, child refugees.
I absolutely agree with the first part of the hon. Gentleman’s
question. A big part of why I and many colleagues supported
Brexit is that we want to be more outward-looking, global and
international; we want to go after trade deals around the world
and have autonomy.
On unaccompanied children and the Dubs amendment, we should not
talk down the United Kingdom, which is currently in the top three
EU countries in terms of the number of unaccompanied children it
takes. It takes 15% of the entire total of unaccompanied
children. We have a proud record, we have made commitments, and
the Home Secretary wrote to the Commission in October on this
issue. It is not necessary for it to be in the withdrawal
agreement Bill itself. We have a proud record, and we should not
talk it down.
Employment Rights
(Bedford) (Lab)
2. What plans the Government have to negotiate for dynamic
alignment with the EU on employment rights after the UK has left
the EU. [900001]
(Blaydon) (Lab)
6. What plans the Government have to negotiate for dynamic
alignment with the EU on employment rights after the UK has left
the EU. [900005]
The Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union ()
The Government have been clear that the future relationship will
protect the UK’s sovereign right to regulate, and have no plans
to align dynamically with EU employment legislation.
Since October, the withdrawal agreement Bill has undergone major
changes, including the stripping out of previous commitments to
workers’ rights. Will the Secretary of State publish a revised
impact assessment so that he can be honest with the public about
what his Government have in store for them with their hard Brexit
plan?
The reality is that we actually go beyond Europe in many areas of
workers’ rights, including maternity and paternity leave, and we
should be proud of that. The hon. Gentleman asks specifically
about the change to the withdrawal agreement Bill, but it does
not affect the rights of workers. It should be for this
Parliament to set the standards. In our manifesto, we committed
to having high standards. The real question that should be asked
is why a number of member states do not meet the standards set
here in the United Kingdom.
So far, the Prime Minister has taken workplace rights out of the
withdrawal agreement in October and the withdrawal agreement Bill
in December. What confidence can we have that workplace rights
will be protected under this Government?
The hon. Lady says that as if she supported the Bill in October,
but she did not. She did not support it when those things were in
the clause, and now she is lamenting that they are out of the
clause that she did not support. The reality is that the purpose
of the withdrawal agreement Bill is to implement the
international agreement that the Prime Minister has reached with
the European Commission. Of course it is for the House, in the
course of its business, to determine what standards it wants on
workers’ rights, the environment and other areas. The Prime
Minister was clear in the manifesto that we are committed to high
standards in those areas. I think that is something that the hon.
Lady and I can agree on.
Mr (South Norfolk) (Con)
Does the Secretary of State agree that, contrary to what the hon.
Member for Bedford () said, we need dynamic
alignment like a hole in the head? The purpose of Brexit is to
enable us to make our own laws and rules, set our own taxes and
chart our own course.
My hon. Friend has championed Parliament’s taking control of
these issues for many years, and he is absolutely right: it is
for this House to determine the standards, and we should have
confidence in its ability to do so.
(Montgomeryshire) (Con)
I thank the Secretary of State for his answer on dynamic
alignment. As his Department winds up, I thank him personally for
leading it with such professionalism, and I thank his team at
DExEU.
On dynamic alignment, I ask my right hon. Friend to reflect on
the fact that the Brexit vote was about this House being
sovereign. For me, as a Welsh Member, that is the Union of the
United Kingdom, and this House being sovereign over our
alignment.
I extend a particularly warm welcome to my hon. Friend on his
return to the House, and I thank him for his contribution to the
Department during his tenure. He is right both in having
confidence in this House setting high standards on workers’
rights and the environment, and in emphasising the importance of
that from a Union perspective. Of course, Wales supported
leaving, just as England did.
(Torfaen) (Lab)
Will the Secretary of State give an absolute guarantee that post
Brexit, under a Conservative Government, there will never be a
point at which workers in the EU27 enjoy stronger employment
rights than they do here?
I am absolutely clear that we will deliver on our
manifesto—[Interruption.] Members seem surprised that the
Government want to deliver on our manifesto. The manifesto says
that we are committed to having high standards. As I said
earlier, the real issue is that, in a number of areas, EU
standards are lower. The UK has three times the maternity
entitlement: it has 52 weeks of maternity leave, 39 of which are
paid, whereas the EU requires only 14 weeks of paid leave. That
is the area that I urge the hon. Gentleman to focus on.
A Government genuinely committed to workers’ rights would have
given a straight yes to that question, but the Secretary of State
did not. If he committed to dynamic alignment on workers’ rights,
there would be nothing stopping the Government going beyond it in
the years ahead. Should we be surprised by their lack of
commitment? The Prime Minister said that the weight of employment
law was “back-breaking”. Is not the truth that the Government
will not end up with stronger rights for UK workers at the end of
this Parliament?
I really do not think Opposition Members should be talking about
a lack of commitment when it comes to the withdrawal agreement,
given that their party leader was neutral on the issue during the
general election. The reality is that the hon. Gentleman, like so
many Members on the Opposition Benches, having said that he would
respect the result of the referendum, went back on the manifesto
commitment and did not do it. It is now time to listen to the
electorate and deliver that. We are absolutely clear that in
doing so, as we set out in our manifesto, we will maintain high
standards on workers’ rights.
Environmental Standards
(High Peak) (Con)
3. What recent discussions he has had with the Secretary of State
for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on maintaining
environmental standards after the UK leaves the EU. [900002]
(West Dorset) (Con)
13. What recent discussions he has had with the Secretary of
State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on maintaining
environmental standards after the UK leaves the EU. [900013]
The Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union ()
I continue to have regular conversations with ministerial
colleagues across Government on all aspects of exiting the
European Union. The Government have been clear that we will not
weaken our current environmental protections as we leave the
European Union, and that we will maintain, and even enhance, our
already high environmental standards.
It is vital that we not only maintain but enhance our
environmental protections, and that we enhance our natural
environment. Can the Secretary of State assure the House that
leaving the EU will not negatively impact on the Nature4Climate
fund and the essential restoration of our peat moorlands,
including in my constituency of High Peak?
I welcome my hon. Friend to his place. He is quite right to
highlight the importance of those protections from a constituency
perspective. I draw his attention to the £10 million that the
Government have allocated for peatland restoration until March
2021, which I hope will give him comfort, alongside the
environmental commitments set out in the Queen’s Speech, such as
the independent monitoring of the targets that have been set, and
the allocation of funding for that specific issue, which I know
he has a close constituency interest in.
The United Kingdom has some of the highest food standards, so
will my right hon. Friend confirm that Her Majesty’s Government
will not allow substandard agricultural or food imports after the
UK leaves the EU, which it would otherwise be illegal to produce
here in the UK?
I welcome my hon. Friend to his place—it is nice to have so many
hon. Friends to welcome today. I am sure that, like me, he
listened to “Farming Today” this morning and heard, in relation
to the Oxford conference, a debate on how important it is to
maintain high animal welfare standards on imports in any future
trade deals. One of the odd points about this debate is that the
Government are constantly asked whether we will maintain high
animal welfare standards, notwithstanding our manifesto
commitments to do so, but there is very little scrutiny of those
areas in Europe that have lower standards. I am sure that we will
explore the issue during the negotiations.
(Sheffield Central)
(Lab)
The Secretary of State will know that the EU’s groundbreaking
European green deal includes many policies with which UK
alignment will be straightforward. Others will be more
challenging. For example, the circular economy action plan will
seek to change business models and set minimum standards for
producers to prevent environmentally harmful products being
placed on the market. He has talked about wanting to lead on
environmental issues, so will the Government commit to adopting
and keeping pace with the proposed minimum standards on
sustainable production?
We are very happy to commit to world-leading environmental
standards. One of the areas where we are doing so is through our
hosting of COP 26 in Glasgow, which will be key, and through
standards—[Interruption.] I will come on to climate change, but
that is integrated in our aspiration—[Interruption.] The hon.
Gentleman is chuntering away, but I will move on to that. On the
specific point about the green deal, he is right that the
Commission President specifically referred to the green deal in
her speech at the London School of Economics yesterday, and it is
something that the Prime Minister and I discussed with her in our
meeting. Again, it is an area where the UK has world-leading
expertise. Look at our green finance, our green investment bank
and the areas where the UK is in the lead. We look forward to
working with the European Union on that as we move forward.
European Court of Justice
(Great
Grimsby) (Con)
4. Whether the UK will be required to comply with (a) EU law and
(b) rulings of the European Court of Justice after the UK leaves
the EU. [900003]
(Bexhill and Battle) (Con)
5. Whether the UK will be required to comply with (a) EU law and
(b) rulings of the European Court of Justice after the UK leaves
the EU. [900004]
(Heywood and Middleton)
(Con)
10. Whether the UK will be required to comply with (a) EU law and
(b) rulings of the European Court of Justice after the UK leaves
the EU. [900010]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Exiting the
European Union ()
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Great Grimsby
() on her
election as the first Conservative MP for Great Grimsby since
1945—fantastic!
The withdrawal agreement ensures that the current role of the
European Union institutions, including the European Court of
Justice, and the obligation to comply with European Union law as
it is now end with the implementation period on 31 December 2020.
There are limited exceptions, such as citizens’ rights, to give
businesses and individuals certainty. The agreement enables a
relationship between sovereign equals.
I thank the Minister for his response. Does he agree that coastal
areas such as my Great Grimsby constituency voted particularly to
ensure that we take back control of our fishing laws, and that it
is essential, following Brexit, that laws governing fishing are
decided here in the UK?
I agree with my hon. Friend. I recognise the importance of this
issue as I, too, represent a coastal constituency. As we leave
the EU, we will be an independent coastal state and we will
introduce our own independent fisheries policy. We will be able
to control access to and management of our waters. That presents
opportunities for the UK fishing industry, and the Government are
determined to make the most of such opportunities for the people
of Grimsby and the rest of the United Kingdom.
On 30 January, I shall be holding a public meeting to explain the
terms of the withdrawal agreement. When I held my last meeting
relating to the previous withdrawal agreement, concern was raised
about the European Court’s ability to determine issues that
arise. Will my hon. Friend confirm that, under articles 167 to
181 of the new withdrawal agreement, while the Court can have
matters referred to it, it cannot actually determine, because we
will now have an arbitration panel, over which the UK will have a
large degree of control?
I can confirm that the withdrawal agreement establishes an
arbitration panel as part of the standard mechanism for settling
disputes between the UK and the EU. After 31 December, the Court
of Justice of the European Union will no longer be the final
arbiter of disputes under the disputes resolution mechanism. I
look forward to an invite to my hon. Friend’s event.
I thank the Minister for his assurances on the ECJ. People in
Heywood and Middleton voted to leave the European Union by a
quite significant margin. Does he agree that the critical reason
for that was a wish to take back control of our laws to this
place and not to be dictated to by Brussels?
It is wonderful to see my hon. Friend in the Chamber—he is not
the first Conservative MP for his constituency since 1945, but
the first ever Conservative MP for Heywood and Middleton. This
Government have prioritised negotiating a deal that disentangles
us from the European Union’s legal order and does indeed take
back control of our laws.
NHS
Dr (Crewe and Nantwich) (Con)
7. What recent discussions he has had with the Secretary of State
for Health and Social Care on the effect on the NHS of the UK
leaving the EU. [900006]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Exiting the
European Union ()
I congratulate my hon. Friend on his election. His experience as
an A&E doctor will, I am sure, pay dividends here. I promised
my office that I would make no jokes about his scrubbing up well
as a new Member of Parliament.
Ministers from the Department for Exiting the European Union
continue to hold regular discussions with Health and Social Care
Ministers. The NHS is, of course, of the utmost importance to the
Government. As was outlined in the Queen’s Speech, the national
health service’s multi-year funding settlement, which was agreed
earlier this year, will be enshrined in law for the first time
ever.
Dr Mullan
I thank the Minister for that response. I know that my
constituents in Crewe and Nantwich are delighted to see the
deadlock broken and the good progress that we are making toward
delivering Brexit responsibly by the end of the month. Does he
agree that significant measures have rightly been taken to ensure
the continued flow of medicines after Brexit, and that the NHS
will continue to be a fantastic place for EU citizens to work in
years to come?
The Government are moving forward on the implementation of the
withdrawal agreement, and we are confident that the deal will be
ratified on 31 January. Under the terms of the agreement, we will
enter the implementation period following 31 January, during
which medical supplies will continue to flow as they do today. My
hon. Friend makes a good point about EU nationals working in the
health service. Since the referendum, almost 7,300 more European
nationals have been working in NHS trusts and clinical
commissioning groups, which should be welcomed.
Dr (Central Ayrshire)
(SNP)
During the election, the Prime Minister promised 50,000 extra
nurses. Given a one-third increase in EU nurses leaving the UK,
does the Minister accept that the Prime Minister must ditch his
anti-immigrant rhetoric, and that there must be improvements to
the settlement scheme so that EU citizens feel both welcome and
secure in the UK?
There have been improvements in tier 2 visas and 700 more EU
doctors have come on board. The hon. Lady talks about the
manifesto and 50,000 more nurses. We will do more on the nurse
bursary scheme, as was promised during the general election.
Dr Whitford
My German GP husband, who has been looking after patients for
over 30 years, was quite offended by the Prime Minister
criticising EU citizens treating this “as their own country”.
There has been a lot of concern about the possible increase in
drug prices for the NHS under a US trade deal, but what estimate
has been made of the increased bureaucratic customs costs for the
37 million packets of drugs that come from the EU every month?
The hon. Lady talks about bureaucracy, but one of the reasons why
we want to take back control is to reduce that bureaucracy. We
will be in control of our own destiny to manage the very issues
that she highlights.
Brendan Clarke-Smith (Bassetlaw) (Con)
Will my hon. Friend confirm that the NHS will receive far more
than £350 million a week in additional funding as the UK leaves
the EU, including in my home constituency of Bassetlaw?
I welcome my hon. Friend to the House and can certainly confirm
that.
EU Citizens
(Ludlow) (Con)
8. What discussions he has had with the Home Secretary on the
level of fees payable by EU citizens who are the spouse of a UK
national and continue to reside in the UK after the UK leaves the
EU. [900008]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Exiting the
European Union ()
The Secretary of State regularly discusses the rights of EU
citizens with the Home Secretary and other Cabinet colleagues. To
protect the right to reside, EU citizens who are resident at the
end of the implementation period must apply for settled status by
June 2021. This is a free-of-charge process, and we have already
received well over 2.6 million applications to the scheme.
I am grateful to the Minister for that reply, and obviously I am
delighted by the progress that the settlement scheme is making in
encouraging EU citizens who are here to remain. In common with
many colleagues in the House, I spent a number of days in the
last few weeks knocking on doors and talking to my constituents.
One of the people I came across was an EU citizen—an Italian who
was married to a British lady and had lived here for over 50
years, working all the time and paying his taxes. He wanted to
become a British citizen, but is faced with an application fee of
£1,700. Does my hon. Friend think that that is fair? Is there
something that we can do to encourage people who have lived here
for a long time to become British citizens?
I am more than happy to meet my right hon. Friend to talk about
the specifics of that case and the EU settlement scheme.
Yesterday the Minister for immigration talked about why that
issue would not be covered by the withdrawal agreement Bill, but
I am more than happy to chat to my right hon. Friend about that
individual case.
(Glenrothes) (SNP)
Does the Minister have even the tiniest twinge of conscience at
the sheer immorality of demanding that somebody pay an
extortionate sum simply to be allowed to continue to live in
their own home?
The settlement scheme is free.
Mr (Kettering) (Con)
To what extent is the Government’s EU settlement scheme in this
country being replicated by the EU27, including with reference to
fees and charges?
My hon. Friend makes a good point. The Prime Minister made a big,
bold offer for EU citizens, and we urge member states to do the
same.
(Strangford) (DUP)
Will the Minister further outline whether he intends to level the
fees between European partners and Commonwealth partners such as
Canada to ensure that there is a level playing field for
immigration? Is he aware that that would reduce the fees paid by
Commonwealth spouses?
Such issues are for the Home Office, but an advantage of taking
back control is that we can look at our relationships with other
parts of the world, particularly the Commonwealth, which makes up
a third of the world by population.
(Beaconsfield) (Con)
Can my hon. Friend assure EU citizens in Beaconsfield that there
is no charge for applying for settled status?
I thank the right hon.—[Interruption.] Sorry, my hon. Friend—the
title does not go with the constituency. I do not know her well,
but she is already a great improvement, and I agree fully.
(Bath) (LD)
9. What recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on
protecting the rights of EU citizens living in the UK after the
UK leaves the EU. [900009]
The Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union ()
I have regular discussions with Cabinet colleagues on citizens’
rights. The withdrawal agreement will protect the rights of EU
citizens who arrive in the UK by the end of the implementation
period. As of the end of November, we were already moving towards
receiving 3 million applications to the EU settlement scheme.
Will EU nationals who fail to get settled status by the end of
this year become our next Windrush generation, losing their
driving licences and jobs, and ultimately facing deportation?
I am glad that the hon. Lady asks that question, because it lets
me say: first, we have a grace period until June 2021 to address
that issue; and, secondly, the declaratory scheme that she
advocates would increase the risk of exactly the issue to which
she refers.
(North West Leicestershire)
(Con)
Does the Secretary of State agree that the fact that 3.5 million
EU citizens see the best future for themselves and their families
as to remain living and working in post-Brexit Britain is a huge
endorsement of our post-Brexit prospects? I wish that that
confidence was shared by hon. Members on both sides of the House.
I urge Members on both sides of the House to support Third
Reading of the withdrawal agreement Bill because it safeguards
the rights of the 3 million EU citizens here, as it does those of
the 1 million or so UK citizens in Europe. The Bill guarantees
the rights of those EU citizens because we value the contribution
they make to our homes, communities and businesses.
(Bristol West) (Lab)
Refusing to provide paper proof of status, rejecting Labour’s
proposal to grant automatic status, granting only uncertainty
inducing pre-settled status to people who have been here legally
for years and the high cost of applying for citizenship—what part
of all that does the Secretary of State believe makes our EU
friends and neighbours living in the UK feel truly valued and
welcome?
The hon. Lady appears to have missed the debate about these
issues in Committee.
No, I was here.
In which case the hon. Lady should well know that the specific
issue of documentation versus digital was raised with the
Minister for Security, who was clear that although there will be
a letter to provide a document, it would have reference to the
digital number. That issue was explored at length. She will also
know that citizens do not lose any rights when they get
pre-settled status, and that they then move on to settled status.
Those issues were debated—that is what a Committee stage is
for—and addressed by a Home Office Minister at that time.
Agricultural Sector
(Thirsk and Malton)
(Con)
12. What discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on
potential opportunities for (a) farmers and (b) the agricultural
sector after the UK leaves the EU. [900012]
(Central Devon) (Con)
23. What discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on
potential opportunities for (a) farmers and (b) the agricultural
sector after the UK leaves the EU. [900023]
The Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union ()
I continue to have regular conversations with ministerial
colleagues on all aspects of exiting the European Union,
including agricultural policy.
Our farmers and food producers are required by domestic
legislation to observe high standards for the environment, the
workplace and animal welfare. Will the Secretary of State confirm
that under future free trade agreements, tariff-free imports will
be allowed only from producers that also observe those standards?
My hon. Friend is right to raise the issue, about which there has
been a live discussion at the Oxford farming conference, as he
will know. The UK has always been a leading advocate of open and
fair competition. I assure him that we are absolutely committed
to maintaining high standards through a robust domestic
enforcement regime.
As this is my right hon. Friend’s last question session as
Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, may I
congratulate him on having served with such distinction?
I very much welcome the Government’s commitment to maintaining
common agricultural policy levels of funding for our farmers, but
during his remaining days in office, may I urge my right hon.
Friend to liaise closely with the Secretary of State for
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to make sure that we come up
with an excellent deal for our hill farmers, many of whom operate
at a level of subsistence yet look after some of the most
beautiful uplands in our land?
I am grateful for my right hon. Friend’s kind remarks. He is
absolutely right to focus on hill farmers. As he will know, one
of the aspects of the agriculture Bill is the ability to target
measures—for example, on the environment—at specific areas of
agriculture. Key among those are hill farmers, whom I know he has
always championed.
(Bristol East) (Lab)
Farmers made it clear in Oxford this week that they simply do not
trust the Government’s assurances. Will the right hon. Gentleman
and the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs give assurances that they will accept the equivalent of
my former new clause 1 to the agriculture Bill, when it comes
back? That would ensure no lowering of standards. Will they also
agree to the National Farmers Union’s request for a trading
standards commission to scrutinise any future trade deals and
make sure that farmers are protected?
If farmers did not trust the assurances, I am not sure whether
another assurance would suddenly become trustworthy.
On the substance of the hon. Lady’s question, I refer her, for
example, to the commitment to set up the office for environmental
protection, which will be the single enforcement body. Above all,
however, I refer her to this House: part of taking back control
will be the House’s ability to scrutinise issues, such as the
legitimate one that she raises, and to ensure that the Government
meet the assurances that they have given.
Mr (East Londonderry)
(DUP)
The Secretary of State will be aware of the importance of the
agri-food sector in Northern Ireland. Will he assure the House,
and the agri-food sector and associated businesses in Northern
Ireland, that his departmental and Cabinet colleagues are very
well aware of that importance and can minimise any threats and
maximise opportunities as we leave the EU?
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right about the importance of
that issue. The former Chair of the Exiting the European Union
Committee referred to the Department’s disbanding, but what is
not disbanding is the expertise within it, which will be shared
across Whitehall, including with the Northern Ireland Office. As
the hon. Gentleman will know, when it comes to the implementation
of the Northern Ireland protocol, that sector and how it plays
into discussions within the Joint Committee will be extremely
important. I am sure that he will contribute fully to that
debate.
(West Aberdeenshire and
Kincardine) (Con)
As in Northern Ireland, the agricultural sector is vital to the
economy of Scotland, where food and drink account for 18% of
international exports. What work is my right hon. Friend’s
Department and the Department for International Trade doing to
ensure that, in our future relationship with the European Union,
the trade in agri-goods is as free and frictionless as possible?
My hon. Friend is right to highlight the importance of the food
and drink sector—not least, for example, when we consider the
Scottish whisky industry, which is key. From memory, the UK has
88 geographical indications, whereas Europe has over 3,000: from
a negotiating point of view, the European Union obviously has
more interest in that issue. From a Scottish point of view,
however, the importance of the intellectual protection of
Scottish whisky and salmon is huge. We are very alive to those
issues.
(Kilmarnock and Loudoun)
(SNP)
22. Scottish farmers and Scotland’s food and drink industry are
completely reliant on existing EU arrangements. A no-deal
crash-out would be disastrous for both sectors, so our
relationship with the EU is critical. Also, trade deals with the
US could undermine environmental standards: if there is a no-deal
crash-out under World Trade Organisation rules, we will not be
able to avoid cheap food involving poorer environmental standards
coming from the States. That future relationship is important, as
are the trade deals that the UK negotiates. Surely the Scottish
Government need a statutory role in both those areas. [900022]
One of the most welcome things about the debate since the general
election has been its more positive tone, and one aspect of that
has been moving on from the language of no-deal crash-outs. The
withdrawal agreement safeguards things such as citizens’ rights.
It includes the Northern Ireland protocol and settles settlement.
We therefore move into a different phase, in which the risks of
no deal that the hon. Gentleman and many others spoke about no
longer apply. That is the benefit of the Prime Minister’s deal
and it is why the hon. Gentleman should support the withdrawal
agreement Bill on Third Reading.
(Stafford) (Con)
Can my right hon. Friend confirm whether the Government will
introduce any changes to the seasonal agricultural workers scheme
after the UK leaves the EU? Farmers in my constituency need
certainty that they can hire the workers they require.
I know from representing a farming area myself the importance of
seasonal workers. Obviously, that debate interplays with the
expansion of investment in agritech, which brings benefits not
only for productivity but in reducing demand. My hon. Friend will
be aware that the Home Office has increased the numbers under the
seasonal agricultural workers scheme to 10,000, but as part of
designing our own approach to immigration and having control of
our borders, we will be able both to address the concerns of the
public at large and to mitigate any specific sectoral issues that
apply, for example, to agriculture.
(Rhondda) (Lab)
Fifty per cent of Welsh lamb is consumed elsewhere in the UK and
45% of it goes to the European Union, so Welsh hill farmers will
probably be the most exposed of all if there is a no-deal Brexit
at the end of this year. Will the Secretary of State do
everything in his power to ensure that the Government do not sign
off on a deal unless it ensures tariff-free access for lamb into
the European Union?
The whole point of the deal—I hope the hon. Gentleman supports it
on Third Reading—is that it ensures that we will leave in a
smooth and orderly way. The specific issues of hill farmers are
matters for both the negotiation and the agriculture Bill. I am
sure he, among others, will contribute to that debate.
Mr Speaker
Question 14. Karl MᶜCartney.
Karl MᶜCartney (Lincoln) (Con)
Thank you, Mr Speaker. It is good to be back—and I do like your
socks.
Fishing and Marine Policy
Karl MᶜCartney (Lincoln) (Con)
14. What recent discussions he has had with the Secretary of
State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on (a) fishing and
(b) marine policy after the UK leaves the EU. [900014]
The Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union ()
I welcome my hon. Friend back to his place as a great champion of
the constituency of Lincoln. We continue to have regular
conversations with ministerial colleagues on all aspects of
exiting the European Union, including fisheries and marine
policy.
Mr Speaker
Topical questions. . [Interruption.]
Sorry—supplementary question, Karl MᶜCartney.
Karl MᶜCartney
And there was me saying I liked your socks.
The good city of Lincoln is not that close to the sea, but
further to the Minister’s answer to Question 4, in percentage
terms and considering everything we now know, how confident is my
right hon. Friend not only that will we leave the common
fisheries policy completely, but that we will then be in full
control of our fishing areas and quotas, and therefore able to
influence international total allowable catches?
I am 100% confident on those issues, because page 46 of the
Conservative manifesto, which I know my hon. Friend knows in
detail, makes it clear that we will leave the common fisheries
policy and become an independent coastal state. For the first
time in more than 40 years, we will have access to UK waters on
our own terms, under our own control, and we will be responsible
for setting fishing opportunities in our own waters.
Topical Questions
(Amber Valley) (Con)
T2. If he will make a statement on his departmental
responsibilities. [900027]
The Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union ()
Since our last departmental questions, we have contested the
general election, where Brexit was the defining issue, and been
given a renewed mandate by the British people to leave the
European Union. As a result, we have been able to bring the
withdrawal agreement back before the House. As was shown during
its Committee stage this week, it is the will of this House that
we now implement that decision.
That has been reflected, as referred to by the Chair of the
Brexit Select Committee, the right hon. Member for Leeds Central
(), in the decision to disband
the Department for Exiting the European Union, as its purpose
will have been achieved. I would like to take this opportunity to
place on the record my thanks to all the officials in the
Department and across Whitehall who have worked so tirelessly
over the last three years to achieve this result, and to thank
all my colleagues who have served in ministerial roles in the
Department.
Yesterday, the Prime Minister and I met the new European
Commission President and the European Union chief negotiator to
discuss our shared desire for what the President described as a
unique partnership reflecting our shared values as friends and
neighbours.
During the three years that the Department has been in place, it
has had three Secretaries of State and three permanent
secretaries but, since the first departmental questions, just one
shadow Brexit Secretary. Throughout my interactions with the
right hon. and learned Member for Holborn and St Pancras
(), he has always been both
professional and courteous while probing and challenging. Without
wishing in any way to jinx his next steps, may I place on the
record his contribution to the scrutiny of the Government, which
I am sure will continue in whatever role he plays in the House
moving forward?
Does the Secretary of State agree that close working between UK
authorities and their equivalents on the continent is key to
making our future relationship work? Now that we have nearly
agreed an orderly exit, will he confirm that discussions between
tax authorities in the UK and France on ensuring that customs
processes are streamlined can start, and will not continue to be
blocked by the European Commission?
It is not so much a question of whether those discussions need to
start; they have started. In our contingency planning for an exit
without a withdrawal agreement, there was a lot of discussion on
how we would manage frictions at our borders, and much of that
can be taken forward, such as the Treasury’s commitment to
driving productivity and improving connectivity and flow through
our ports. There is work on this already; my hon. Friend is quite
right to draw attention to it, and we intend to build on it.
(Holborn and St Pancras)
(Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for his kind words. I appreciate
the relationship that we have had, and, in particular, his
kindness when my father died at the tail end of 2018, which
touched me personally. I welcome the hon. Member for Beaconsfield
() and all Members, but I
strongly dissociate myself from the words of the Parliamentary
Under-Secretary of State about the former right hon. and learned
Member for Beaconsfield, who gave distinguished service in this
House, including as Attorney General for the Government. I hope
that there might be an opportunity to correct the record on that.
Yesterday, the Government voted down the Opposition’s amendment
on unaccompanied child refugees. Our amendment would have
preserved the victory that Lord Alf Dubs had campaigned for. I
have always had a good personal relationship with the Secretary
of State, but whatever he says about the wider issues, he must
know that the Government have got this wrong. This could be his
last Brexit oral questions; is he prepared to reconsider? I urge
him to do so.
To understand the context, it is important to look at the
commitment the Government gave to commencing negotiations on this
issue, as reflected in the letter of 22 October from the Home
Secretary to the European Commission. As was touched on in
earlier questions, the Government have a strong record on this.
They take 15% of unaccompanied child refugees; we are one of the
top three EU countries in that regard. That commitment on
granting asylum and supporting refugees remains; it is actually
embedded in our manifesto, on page 23. In the European Union
(Withdrawal Agreement) Bill, we return to the traditional
approach, in which the Government undertake the negotiation and
Parliament scrutinises that, rather than Parliament setting the
terms, as happened in the last Parliament.
I am disappointed by the Secretary of State’s reply. Labour will
continue to fight to protect the most vulnerable. We may not win
many votes in Parliament just now, but we can win the moral
argument. I urge everyone who cares about the issue to put
pressure on the Government, and urge Ministers to rethink this
disgraceful decision. A legal obligation on the Government has
been converted into reliance on the Prime Minister’s word. Surely
the Secretary of State can see why that gives rise to anxiety
among Labour Members.
The shadow Brexit Secretary is right: there clearly has been
anxiety among Labour Members, but I hope that he takes assurance
from the explanation I gave that the commitment is unchanged.
That is reflected in the letter of 22 October to the Commission
from the Home Secretary, and in the manifesto. The policy is
unchanged. It is right that the Bill should, as is traditional,
implement the international agreement; that is what it will do.
(Hastings and Rye) (Con)
T3. In beautiful Hastings and Rye, we have two ancient fishing
communities, one of which is the under-10 metre beach-launch
fleet, which is, by its very nature, environmentally and
ecologically responsive and sustainable. It is vital that this
ancient fishing tradition be given room and opportunity to
flourish. Can the Secretary of State confirm that specific
attention will be given to our under-10 metre boats, so that they
are given more autonomy and flexibility in a post-Brexit Britain?
[900028]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Exiting the
European Union ()
May I take the opportunity to say that I have the utmost respect
for the previous Member for Beaconsfield? I was simply trying to
say that as a Government Minister, I found the particular line of
questioning raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Beaconsfield
() much more helpful to
respond to. I hope that the House will take that as an apology to
the previous Member for Beaconsfield.
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Hastings and Rye
() on her question, and on her election to the House. I
can confirm that we will pay special attention to the 10-metre
fleet; it is an issue that I am aware of, as a coastal MP; in
Southend, we have some under-10 metre boats. I also confirm that
as we leave the EU and become an independent coastal state, the
Government will develop a domestic fisheries policy that promotes
that fleet, which is profitable and diverse, and uses traditional
practices to protect stocks and our precious marine environment.
(Warwick and Leamington)
(Lab)
T7. For many decades, our creative industries and particularly
our performing arts have been a major export of the UK. Will the
Minister explain what discussions he has had with the Secretary
of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport about the impacts
of Brexit—a hard no-deal Brexit, in particular—on the movement of
our performing arts between here and Europe? [900032]
I welcome the fact that the hon. Gentleman has drawn the House’s
attention to a sector that is extremely important to the
potential of the UK. I have discussed the issue with my
ministerial colleagues. As for his characterisation, part of the
reason for the withdrawal agreement Bill, which I hope he will
support on Third Reading, is to secure the rights of the 3
million EU citizens, many of whom contribute to the creative
arts. Future policy, however, is for the immigration Bill, where
we will design something that is targeted at talents, including
the talents of those in the creative industries.
(Bury South) (Con)
T4. May I say how warming it is to be greeted by a fellow
Lancastrian? Does my right hon. Friend agree that his Department
should be commended for ensuring that this Government will
deliver on the verdict and the will of the British people, in
that we will leave the European Union on 31 January? With the
closure of DExEU at the end of this month, perhaps he is a victim
of his own success. [900029]
It must be a happy day, and one to celebrate, when there are so
many Lancastrians in the House. My hon. Friend is right to draw
attention to the achievements of officials within the Department
who have worked so hard to support the Government in getting this
deal. It is an important moment, and in part, the closure of the
Department will enable us to take the expertise built up by
officials over the past three years into those Departments that
will be front and centre in the trade negotiations.
(Enfield, Southgate)
(Lab)
T8. Will the Minister confirm whether EU citizens who work and
pay taxes in the UK post Brexit will be liable for the
immigration health surcharge? Does he envisage similar charges
being introduced for UK citizens living and working in the EU?
[900033]
I am happy to guarantee to all those EU citizens living in the UK
ahead of our exit that the withdrawal agreement Bill guarantees
their rights, among which are their rights to healthcare. That is
why I urge the hon. Gentleman to support the Bill on Third
Reading.
(Southport) (Con)
T5. Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the UK will remain an
open, dynamic and welcoming place for EU citizens to study in our
world-class universities, and that Britain continues to lead the
way with the internationally recognised quality of our higher
education? [900030]
I thank my hon. Friend for that question. The Government are
clear that they wish to continue to attract students from the EU
and the rest of the world to study here in the UK. The UK’s
higher education institutions have long-established traditions of
attracting the brightest minds at all stages of their education
and research careers, as we saw yesterday with the alumna of the
London School of Economics. This being our last oral questions, I
thank civil servants for their support. I particularly thank my
private office and Cara Phillips. They have been wonderful.
(Swansea West)
(Lab/Co-op)
The Secretary of State knows that Airbus contributes billions of
pounds in taxation, employs tens of thousands of people and wants
business continuity after a short transition period. Will he give
an undertaking today that the European Union Aviation Safety
Agency will continue as is—rather than us inventing new, bespoke
regulatory systems for the sake of divergence—so that Airbus can
plan ahead, invest and continue to make its contribution to our
economy?
The hon. Gentleman correctly draws the House’s attention to an
important issue, and one for the future negotiations. As he
knows, however, in the political declaration there is scope for
such participation. What was constructive and positive about the
remarks of the President of the European Commission yesterday,
which were reflected in the meeting with the Prime Minister, was
the desire to build on that close partnership. The sort of areas
where there will be detailed discussion will be on aircraft and
other such sectors.
(West Dorset) (Con)
T9. Through the EU single market, our supermarkets lever enormous
power on food supply chain prices. Leaving the single market is a
huge opportunity for small farmers in this country. What steps
will Her Majesty’s Government be taking to redress that imbalance
and to ensure a fair price for our farmers, not only in West
Dorset but across the United Kingdom? [R] [900034]
My hon. Friend is right to seize the opportunities that Brexit
offers, and that is particularly the case in agriculture. He well
knows that the bureaucracy of the common agricultural policy was
an area of deep frustration, with things such as the three-crop
rule dictating to farmers who farm more than 30 hectares what
they can and cannot grow. We should be setting farmers free and
giving them those opportunities. Through the agriculture Bill, we
will have the chance to seize those opportunities, and I know
that my hon. Friend will be at the forefront of that for his
constituents in West Dorset.
