Extracts from Parliamentary proceedings - Jan 26
|
Extract from Exiting the EU oral questions Hilary Benn (Leeds
Central) (Lab): The Government say they want nothing further to do
with the European Court of Justice but, as the Secretary of State
well knows, in any new free trade agreement with the 27 member
states there will have to be a legal arbitration mechanism whose
rulings we will be obliged to implement. If the European Court of
Justice is not acceptable, what court would be? The Secretary of
State for Exiting the...Request free
trial
Extract from Exiting the
EU oral questions
Hilary Benn (Leeds Central) (Lab): The Government say they want nothing further to do with the European Court of Justice but, as the Secretary of State well knows, in any new free trade agreement with the 27 member states there will have to be a legal arbitration mechanism whose rulings we will be obliged to implement. If the European Court of Justice is not acceptable, what court would be? The Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (Mr David Davis): It would not necessarily be a court. The right hon. Gentleman is quite right that most international—[Interruption.] Listen to the answer. Most international trade agreements have an arbitration mechanism, and that mechanism is normally preceded by a mediation mechanism, which is used more often. In the case of the Canada arbitration mechanism, for example, three people—one from each side and one neutral—are appointed by agreement. It is a fall-back if agreement cannot be reached, and it is a simple arbitration mechanism. There is all the difference in the world between a simple arbitration mechanism and a Court that reaches into every nook and cranny of your society. Extract from Business Questions Valerie Vaz (Walsall South) (Lab):...Staying with the EU, will the Leader of the House find time for a debate on the comprehensive economic and trade agreement between the EU and Canada? The Secretary of State for International Trade has apparently given a commitment on behalf of the Government before the plenary vote in the EU on 15 February, and confirmed to the Chair of the European Scrutiny Committee that he had overridden parliamentary scrutiny. I am sure that the Leader of the House will say something about that...The Leader of the House of Commons (Mr David Lidington):...The hon. Lady asked about the comprehensive economic and trade agreement and the override. There was a need for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Trade to override the normal scrutiny procedures, because the EU timetable for agreement within the Council accelerated faster than we had expected, and it was in our interests—in terms of our relationship with Canada, our support for free trade as a principle, and our EU relationships with other countries—to agree. The UK has been championing that agreement since the inception of negotiations. However, I said in my evidence to the Scrutiny Committee two weeks ago that we would seek an opportunity possibly to try to link the debate on CETA to a wider debate on international trade before much longer.... Extract from Commons debate on Breast Cancer Drugs Julie Elliott (Sunderland Central) (Lab): Does my hon. Friend agree that the fact that that drug is routinely available in France, Germany, Austria and Canada shows that our appraisal system is not working in this country.
Siobhain McDonagh (Mitcham and Morden)
(Lab): I agree with my hon. Friend. It is amazing to
think that, for this particular drug, it will take longer to get
overall survival data because people are living longer without
their cancer spreading. That obvious success is seen as a big
disadvantage in the NICE appraisal system. The cost of
Palbociclib will appear to be much higher in the NICE formula
because overall survival data are given much more weight than
progression-free survival. That seems illogical to me...
Extract from
Westminster Hall debate on Civil Society Space Extract from Lords debate on Brexit: UK International Relations
Lord Hylton (CB):...It is
crucial that this sad history should not be repeated for today’s
refugees from Iraq, Syria and some African countries. The
emphasis for all, whether in camps or not, should be on acquiring
skills in preparation for return to their own countries. We will,
however, need solutions in third countries for those who will not
go home. The report rightly calls for a global plan, and large
and developed states—for example, the United States, Canada and
Brazil, along with Australia and New Zealand—will have a vital
part to play. We should note that some cities in Syria and Iraq
have been so destroyed that a huge input will be needed to make
them habitable. I saw this for myself in Homs and Aleppo... |
