Asked by
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the opening of trade
talks with the governments of India, Greenland, and Israel, what
steps they intend to take to support parliamentary scrutiny of
the negotiating objectives.
The Minister of State, Department for Business, Energy and
Industrial Strategy and Department for International Trade
() (Con)
My Lords, the Government welcome parliamentary scrutiny of our
negotiation objectives. The India objectives were recently
published, and we will publish our negotiating objectives for our
updated Israel agreement in due course. The Government are
negotiating to swiftly restore the terms of our trading
relationship with Greenland. If the IAC should publish a report
on these objectives, of course the Government will consider it
with interest and facilitate a debate on the objectives, subject
to parliamentary time.
(Lab)
My Lords, in addition to that, I should say that the Minister
very nicely, at 10 pm last night, sent me an extremely helpful
letter which said that, as the International Agreements Committee
had been asking, there would be an exchange of correspondence
between the Government and our committee about how we deal with
scrutiny. We have been asking for that since September, so I
welcome the letter sent last night. In light of that, it would be
a bit churlish, perhaps, to say that it was a shame that the New
Zealand agreement was published before it had been shared with
our committee, so let us put that to one side. For the moment, I
thank the Minister for managing to engineer this big move forward
and just ask him to confirm that when that exchange of letters
has been agreed, it will be published in the normal manner.
(Con)
My Lords, it is a great pleasure to be congratulated by the noble
Baroness; I have a high respect for her and for the committee she
chairs. I apologise that there was a little bit of confusion in
the timing of the New Zealand publication. It was a bureaucratic
error because so much was going on, and I apologise to the noble
Baroness and the House for that short delay.
The (CB)
My Lords, Article 218 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union deals with all agreements between the EU and third
countries. It says:
“The European Parliament shall be immediately and fully informed
at all stages”.
Through this article, the scrutiny processes of the committee of
this House were engaged. Why was this piece of EU law not
retained?
(Con)
My Lords, the Government have put in place a suite of enhanced
scrutiny arrangements that go well beyond our statutory
obligations, so we have no need to refer back to EU law in that
instance.
The Lord Speaker ()
I call the noble Baroness, Lady Brinton, to speak virtually.
(LD) [V]
My Lords, the Government have inserted in the Health and Care
Bill, which is currently going through your Lordships’ House, a
clause on reciprocal healthcare agreements beyond the existing
arrangements with the EU, EEA and Switzerland, because we know
they work well. Will reciprocal healthcare agreements form part
of the trade talks with India, Greenland and Israel?
(Con)
My Lords, I am not yet in a position to give an answer on that.
We are at the very beginning of our journey with India but, as
always, we will report progress to the House as the talks
progress.
(Con)
My Lords, does the Minister agree that it is incumbent upon all
of us to do everything we can to promote trade with all
countries, particularly the three countries listed in the
Question? Therefore, does he hope, as I do, that the whole House
condemns the approach taken by certain local authority pension
funds in imposing boycotts, divestment and sanctions on just one
country: Israel?
(Con)
My Lords, I think the House recognises that trade is one of the
surest ways to economic advancement for a whole range of
countries. The UK is strongly committed to our trade and
investment relationship with Israel, one of the Middle East’s
most dynamic and innovative economies.
(Lab)
My Lords, will the Minister commit the Government to including in
the parliamentary scrutiny of the negotiating objectives the aim
that global companies that try to abuse and infiltrate food
markets—I am not suggesting that any of the three countries
mentioned are included in that—should be excluded? Should we not
exclude in our negotiating commitments all companies that have
proven criminal records in food markets?
(Con)
My Lords, the Government and I have made clear on a number of
occasions that we will never enter into a free trade agreement
which in any way diminishes the high standards of food in this
country.
(Con)
My Lords, I congratulate my noble friend on opening negotiations
with Greenland, and I declare my interest as someone of
half-Danish heritage and co-chair of the All-Party Parliamentary
Group on Denmark. How will this negotiation differ from the
arrangements we had through our membership of the EU? Will he
join with me in recognising the importance of Greenland, with its
rich fisheries, oil and minerals, and its lithium deposits?
(Con)
My Lords, my noble friend always makes a good point, and the
negotiations with Greenland provide the opportunity to recognise
the UK’s broader bilateral relationship with it. Greenland is an
important strategic partner for us, and this agreement will allow
us to identify areas for future co-operation, including on UK
priorities such as science, research, sustainability, gender
equality, critical minerals, a stable Arctic and climate change.
(Lab)
My Lords, I am grateful for this opportunity and I am not as kind
as my noble friend Lady Hayter, so I will be churlish. Can we
return to the issue of parliamentary scrutiny? The letter that my
noble friend alludes to is about trade treaties and is not much
wider than that. Is the Minister aware that the diplomatic
missions of the countries with which we are seeking to strike
agreements watch how Parliament discusses these issues? If there
is not proper scrutiny, they will conclude that there is an
attempt to hide our failure, there is incompetence, or we have a
Government who do not take parliamentary scrutiny into account.
(Con)
My Lords, “churlish” is an adjective that I would never like to
apply to the noble Baroness. I think I have made our attitude
towards scrutiny of free trade agreements very clear. Of course,
I will draw to the attention of my colleagues in the Foreign,
Commonwealth and Development Office her comments on other
treaties and agreements.
(LD)
My Lords, it is very encouraging to hear that we are now
negotiating with Greenland. Can the Minister tell us what British
export sectors will benefit most from a trade agreement with
Greenland, and does he think that that will help in a significant
way to counterbalance the deterioration of our trade with the
European continent?
(Con)
My Lords, I am very happy to deal with that. Greenland is an
important exporter of seafood to the UK, accounting for 40% of
the total value of UK imports of cold-water prawns in 2020. For
those who enjoy their prawn cocktails, I can think of no better
statistic.
(CB)
While I join the noble Lord and the noble Baroness, Lady Hayter,
in congratulating each other on the Government deciding not to
resile on trade agreements and commitments made by the noble Lord
himself at the Dispatch Box, I do find their letter a little
unsatisfactory in that it is limited to trade, thus meaning that
we are still much less well informed than we were when Article
218 of the treaty applied. Also, it casts some doubt on the
Ponsonby rule, which has governed the Government’s provision of
information on international agreements to Parliament for 98
years. Would the Minister confirm that the Government have no
intention of resiling from the Ponsonby rule?
(Con)
My Lords, first, if I may just offer a small correction to the
noble Lord, the Ponsonby rule survived for 86 years before it was
supplanted by CRaG. I can completely confirm that now that they
are governed by CRaG, the Government will abide by CRaG in all
the appropriate circumstances.
(Con)
My Lords, does my noble friend accept that however much
Parliament oversees free trade agreements, it cannot amend them?
(Con)
My Lords, I recognise the point, but free trade agreements are
negotiated under the royal prerogative. The House has full
opportunities to scrutinise these agreements as they move to
ratification, and I believe this should be sufficient for noble
Lords.
(Lab Co-op)
My Lords, could the Minister and any of his colleagues who have
contacts with the Government of India suggest they take a more
robust attitude in relation to the Russian invasion of Ukraine?
(Con)
My Lords, I will make sure that those comments are passed on to
the appropriate parties.
