Asked by
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what contingency plans they have
in the event of a deal not being agreed with the European Union
by the end of the transition period.
The Question was considered in a Virtual Proceeding via video
call.
The Minister of State, Cabinet Office () (Con)
My Lords, at the end of this year we will have recovered our
economic and political independence on the basis of the agreement
that we reached in October. Whether our relationship is on a
Canada model or an Australian one, we will be leaving the single
market and the customs union at the end of the year. As such,
there is a fixed baseline of guaranteed changes for government,
citizens and businesses to prepare against in these areas.
(Lab)
My Lords, no one could have foreseen that the Covid-19 pandemic
would take place when the withdrawal agreement was drawn up. Does
the Minister agree that if there is a no-deal Brexit there is no
contingency plan that can prevent enormous damage to the economy,
jobs, business and industry? Furthermore, is he not aware that
every reputable body and commentator says that we ought to extend
the timetable in order that we can get a better deal for this
country? Surely that is the way forward.
My Lords, I do not agree with the noble Lord in the picture that
he presents of either unpreparedness or impossibility. We will
seek and are seeking a free trade agreement with the European
Union and we are carrying on negotiations in a number of areas,
including one that I know is important to him: we are committed
to seeking reciprocal agreements with the EU, for example, for
family reunion of unaccompanied children. This work goes on and
it can be done.
(Lab)
My Lords, given that the Social Market Foundation has calculated
this week that the regions that will suffer most from the double
shock of a no deal plus the pandemic will be the north-west and
the Midlands, as well as sectors crucial to the economy such as
finance and insurance, what plans do the Government have to
mitigate the damage that this will do to such vital areas of the
country and the economy?
My Lords, the Government seek to extend the opportunities of our
being outside the European Union and to enable businesses and
citizens to prepare for the change for which the people of this
country voted and for which Parliament legislated. Of course, in
our strategy of levelling up, we will have particular regard to
any parts of the country that are affected in particular ways.
(LD)
My Lords, in his evidence to your Lordships’ House’s EU Committee
last week, the UK’s Brexit negotiator, Mr , said that
“the Canada and Australia outcomes are similar”
if not identical. These are of course shorthand for a free trade
agreement and no deal. Why are the Government so minimalist in
their aims compared to the goal of
“an ambitious, broad, deep … partnership … with a comprehensive …
Free Trade Agreement at its core”
that they signed up for in the political declaration last
October?
My Lords, I watched the evidence given by my right honourable
friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and by Mr
. I thought that they came
over—I hope your Lordships will agree—as people who were seeking
a responsible and reasonable agreement with the European Union. I
am confident that those negotiations will succeed.
(Ind Lab)
My Lords, Goldman Sachs has estimated that Britain’s economy has
already lost 2.5% of GDP since the referendum. According to the
Government’s own calculations, Brexit will cost 6.7% of GDP, or
£130 billion, over the next 15 years. What assessment have Her
Majesty’s Government made of the combined economic cost to the UK
of Brexit and Covid-19?
My Lords, I am a veteran of listening to baleful predictions
about what might happen if the British people made the decision
that they did. The Government have made it clear that they will
invite evidence and opinions from a range of economists and
others as to what the future might hold, but our position is that
this is an opportunity and a duty, and we intend to deliver it.
(CB)
My Lords, does the Minister accept that if no progress is made
soon with the EU on farming and animal welfare standards, which
is an issue of great concern to Parliament as well as to the
country, it must surely inhibit our negotiators in the US FTA in
maintaining those same standards and is therefore likely to lead
to an inadequate mini-deal?
My Lords, the noble Earl is quite right to refer to the
importance of agricultural products, which is obviously a matter
being discussed in the ongoing negotiations. I am not following
him into any linkages. My interest and that of the Government is
to secure the best outcome in the negotiations that are going on
as we speak.
(Lab)
My Lords, yesterday’s EU Committee report described the continued
uncertainty and lack of time for a deal, combined with the
pandemic, as
“a potent threat to economic prosperity and political stability
in Northern Ireland.”
Businesses still do not know what to expect by way of customs
processes, regulatory checks and exit summary declarations on
goods from GB to Northern Ireland. Without a comprehensive free
trade agreement, the consequences for Northern Ireland could be
seismic. Can the Minister outline plans to advise businesses in
Northern Ireland and GB and help them prepare for the future in
case such an agreement is not reached by the year end?
My Lords, I read with great interest your Lordships’ report on
the Northern Ireland protocol. I do not agree with every judgment
in it, but it was very valuable and the Government will make a
response in due course. I said—I think when I answered the noble
Baroness on a previous occasion—that a business engagement forum
in Northern Ireland is imminent. A process of engagement with
business across the country is of great importance, is ongoing
and will be intensified.
(LD)
My Lords, the Minister in his first Answer said that we are
negotiating on the basis of the agreement reached last October.
Earlier this year, we had a number of authoritative briefings,
presumably from No. 10, to say that the decisive result of last
December’s general election in effect sidelined the political
declaration and that we were now negotiating on what the Minister
also described as a more minimalist arrangement. The political
declaration talked about an “overarching” framework and a
continuing security, foreign policy and defence relationship,
which is a great deal more than Canada or Australia. Have we now
abandoned the political declaration, or are we still, as the
European Commission would like, negotiating on the basis of that
agreement?
My Lords, we have put into law a withdrawal agreement, including
the NI protocol, and that is the basis of our continuing policy.
The Government have published a number of documents which have
been laid before your Lordships’ House on our approach to
negotiations and, most recently, on the Northern Ireland
protocol. That is the basis on which we are proceeding, in good
faith and hope.
The Lord Speaker ()
. No? .
(CB)
Does the Minister agree that the only contingency worth
considering at this moment is that if we stay tied to the
European Union beyond 31 December, we face paying into a
dramatically increased EU budget next year, with new taxes? It
has been estimated that staying in might cost us £380 billion
over the next two years. Is it not time to make sure that we get
out by 31 December?
My Lords, I am not going with any particular prediction on this
question, as I did not on an earlier one—there will be a range of
opinions—but I fully agree with the noble Baroness that, were we
to stay attached to the EU beyond December, we would face
uncertain, unknown but substantial costs in terms of our duties
to make payments to the European Union.
(Non-Afl)
What resources will be provided to implement the Northern
Ireland/Ireland protocol in terms of staff and finance?
My Lords, I cannot give a particular figure in reply to the noble
Baroness, but, as I have tried to stress to her before, the
Government recognise fully the importance of securing the
internal market with Northern Ireland and will do all in their
power to assist with that and to maintain the position that
exists now.
