Informal European Council 3.36 pm The Prime Minister
(Mrs Theresa May) Before I turn to the European Council, I am
sure the whole House will want to join me in sending our
congratulations to Her Majesty the Queen as she marks her sapphire
jubilee today. It is testimony to Her Majesty’s selfless devotion
to the nation that she is marking becoming our first monarch to
reign for...Request free trial
Informal European Council
3.36 pm
-
The Prime Minister (Mrs Theresa May)
Before I turn to the European Council, I am sure the whole
House will want to join me in sending our congratulations
to Her Majesty the Queen as she marks her sapphire jubilee
today. It is testimony to Her Majesty’s selfless devotion
to the nation that she is marking becoming our first
monarch to reign for sixty-five years not with any special
celebration, but instead by getting on with the job to
which she has dedicated her life. On behalf of the whole
country, I am proud to offer Her Majesty our humble thanks
for a lifetime of extraordinary service. Long may she
continue to reign over us all.
Turning to last week’s informal European Council in Malta,
Britain is leaving the European Union but we are not
leaving Europe, and a global Britain that stands tall in
the world will be a Britain that remains a good friend and
ally to all our European partners. So at this summit we
showed how Britain will continue to play a leading role in
Europe long after we have left the EU, in particular
through our contribution to the challenge of managing mass
migration; through our special relationship with America;
and through the new and equal partnership that we want to
build between the EU and an independent, self-governing,
global Britain. Let me take each point in turn.
First, on migration, the discussion focused on the route
from Libya across the central Mediterranean. As I have
argued, we need a comprehensive and co-ordinated approach,
and that is exactly what the Council agreed. That includes
working hard in support of an inclusive political
settlement to stabilise Libya, which will help not only to
tackle migration flows, but to counter terrorism. It means
working to reduce the pull factors that encourage people to
risk their lives and building the capacity of the Libyans
to return migrants to their own shores, treat them with
dignity and help them return home. It means looking beyond
Libya and moving further upstream, including by urgently
implementing the EU’s external investment plan to help
create more opportunities in migrants’ home countries and
by helping genuine refugees to claim asylum in the first
safe country they reach. It also means better
distinguishing between economic migrants and refugees,
swiftly returning those who have no right to remain and
thereby sending out a deterrence message to others thinking
of embarking on perilous journeys. The Council agreed
action in all those areas.
Britain is already playing a leading role in the region and
at the summit I announced further steps, including
additional support for the Libyan coastguard and more than
£30 million of new aid for the most vulnerable refugees
across Greece, the Balkans, Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco,
Algeria, Sudan and Libya. Britain is also setting up an £8
million special protection fund to keep men, women and
children in the Mediterranean region safe from trafficking,
sexual violence and labour exploitation as part of our
commitment to tackle modern slavery. The Council agreed
with my call that we should do everything possible to deter
this horrific crime, including by introducing tough
penalties for those who trade in human misery and by
working together to secure the necessary evidence for
prosecutions that can put these criminals behind bars,
where they belong.
Turning to America, I opened a discussion on engaging the
new Administration, and I was able to relay the
conversation I had with President Trump at the White House
about the important history of co-operation between the
United States and the countries of Europe. In particular, I
confirmed that the President had declared his 100%
commitment to NATO as the cornerstone of our security in
the west. I also made it clear, however, that every country
needed to share the burden and play its full part, meeting
the NATO target of spending 2% on defence. It is only by
investing properly in our defence that we can ensure we are
properly equipped to keep our people safe.
I was also able to relay my discussions with President
Trump on the importance of maintaining the sanctions regime
on Russia in response to its actions in Ukraine, and I very
much welcome the strong words last week from the new US
ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, in
confirming America’s continued support for these sanctions.
Of course, there are some areas where we disagree with the
approach of the new Administration, and we should be clear
about those disagreements and about the values that
underpin our response to the global challenges we face. I
also argued at the Council, however, that we should engage
patiently and constructively with America as a friend and
ally—an ally that has helped to guarantee the longest
period of peace that Europe has ever known. For we should
be clear that the alternative of division and confrontation
would only embolden those who would do us harm, wherever
they may be.
Finally turning to Brexit, European leaders welcomed the
clarity of the objectives we set out for the negotiation
ahead. They warmly welcomed our ambition to build a new
partnership between Britain and the EU that is in the
interests of both sides. They also welcomed the recognition
that we in Britain want to see a strong and successful EU,
because that is in our interests and the interests of the
whole world.
On the issue of acquired rights, the general view was that
we should reach an agreement that applied equally to the
other 27 member states and the UK, which is why we think a
unilateral decision from the UK is not the right way
forward. As I have said before, however, EU citizens living
in the UK make a vital contribution to our economy and our
society, and without them we would be poorer and our public
services weaker. We will therefore make securing a
reciprocal agreement that will guarantee their status a
priority as soon as the negotiations begin, and I want to
see this agreed as soon as possible, because that is in
everyone’s interests.
Our European partners now want to get on with the
negotiations. So do I, and so does this House, which last
week voted by a majority of 384 in support of the
Government triggering article 50. There are, of course,
further stages for the Bill in Committee and in the other
place, and it is right that this process should be
completed properly, but the message is clear to all: this
House has spoken, and now is not the time to obstruct the
democratically expressed wishes of the British people. It
is time to get on with leaving the EU and building an
independent, self-governing, global Britain. I commend this
statement to the House.
3.42 pm
-
(Islington North)
(Lab)
I thank the Prime Minister for her statement and for
advance sight of it, and I echo her sentiments towards Her
Majesty. I wish her Majesty well at this auspicious time in
her life and thank her for her service.
The Prime Minister has used this curiously named “informal”
EU summit to press the EU’s NATO members to fulfil their
defence expenditure requirements. The last Labour
Government consistently spent over 2% on defence. The Tory
Government’s cuts since 2010 have demoralised our armed
forces, cut spending by 11% in the last Parliament and
reduced the size of the Army from 82,000 to 77,000. As well
as making these cuts, they have changed the way the 2%
spending is calculated. Given that she is lecturing other
countries, will she tell the House why her Government
changed the accounting rules to include aspects of
expenditure not previously included? The Defence Select
Committee in 2015 noted that the Government were only
meeting the 2% figure by including areas, such as pensions,
not previously included. It went on to say that
“this ‘redefinition’ of defence expenditure undermines, to
some extent, the credibility of the Government’s assertion
that the 2% figure represents a…increase”.
To add to this disarray, this weekend, The Sunday Times
uncovered a series of equipment failures and bungled
procurement deals, including apparently ordering light
tanks that are too big to fit in the aircraft that are
supposed to be transporting them. This really does cast
some doubt on the Government’s competence in this area, so
perhaps it is not such a good idea to go lecturing other
countries on defence spending and procurement.
Labour has long been concerned about poor planning and
short-sightedness by the Ministry of Defence and long
delays in delivering projects. The extent to which the MOD
appears to have lost control of some of its biggest
equipment projects is worrying, and it would be nice to
know what action the Prime Minister is taking on this
matter.
Earlier today, the Prime Minister had a meeting with the
Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. Did she make it
clear to him that, as is often mentioned in this House and
by the Prime Minister herself, there is continued
opposition by the British Government to the illegal
settlements being built in the Occupied Palestinian
Territories?
Labour has been unequivocal about the fact that it is
within this Government’s gift to guarantee the rights of EU
citizens to remain in this country. There is no need to
wait for negotiations to begin; the Government could do it
now. This is not a question about Brexit; it is a question
about human rights, democracy and decency towards people
who have lived and worked in this country. Many families
have had children born here, and I think we must guarantee
their rights. Many of those people have been left in limbo,
and are very deeply concerned and stressed. Did the Prime
Minister discuss this issue with her European counterparts,
and will she today provide those people with the clarity
and assurances that they both need and, I believe, deserve?
We are clear that we accept the mandate of the British
people to leave the European Union, but we will not accept
this Government turning this country into a bargain
basement tax haven on the shores of Europe.
Finally, we welcome the additional £30 million that the
Government have committed to the refugee crisis across
Europe. Last week at Prime Minister’s Question Time, the
Prime Minister said that the UK had resettled 10,000
refugees from Syria. According to the House of Commons
Library, we have resettled less than half that
figure—4,414. There is an ongoing and grave human tragedy
that has resulted in more than 5,000 people drowning in the
Mediterranean last year and 254 already this year, and we
are only at the beginning of February.
I believe that we should also note the phenomenal
commitment of the Government and people of Greece to the
huge number of refugees in their country, and the
difficulties they are having in supporting them. What
conversations did she have with her Greek counterpart on
this important matter? I also say to the Prime Minister
that, even post- Brexit, this is an issue that will affect
every country in Europe. It is the biggest humanitarian
crisis that we have ever faced in the world, and we will
need to co-ordinate as a continent to address this issue
with all the humanity and resources that our collective
values determine should be deployed towards it.
-
The Prime Minister
The right hon. Gentleman opened his remarks by referring to
what I think he called the “curiously named” informal
Council. It is the convention that at every new
presidency—there are two new presidencies each year—the
presidency holds an informal Council in which people are
able to talk about a number of issues looking ahead to the
formalities of the Council. There we are; that is what
happens; and that is what we were doing in Valletta.
The right hon. Gentleman referred to my meeting earlier
today with Prime Minister Netanyahu, and I have to say that
this was not a subject for discussion at the European Union
Council last week. However, I have made the UK Government’s
position on settlements clear, and I continued to do that
today.
The right hon. Gentleman raised the issue of UK nationals.
As he said, it is absolutely right that we value the
contribution that EU citizens are making here in the United
Kingdom—their contribution to our communities, our economy,
our society, and, as I have said, to our public
services—but I think it is also right that we ensure that
the rights of UK citizens living in other European states
are maintained. It is clear from the conversations that I
have had with a number of European leaders about this issue
that they think that it should be dealt with in the round
as a matter of reciprocity, but, as was made plain by, for
example, the conversations that I had with Prime Minister
Rajoy of Spain, we are all very clear about the fact that
we want to give reassurance to people as early as possible
in the negotiations.
The right hon. Gentleman talked about the issue of
refugees, and about people drowning in the Mediterranean.
Of course the loss of life that we have seen has been
terrible, as is the continuing loss of life that we are
seeing despite the best efforts of the United Kingdom: the
Royal Navy and Border Force have been there, acting with
others to protect and rescue people. That is why it is so
important that we stop people making that perilous journey
in the first place and risking their lives, and that is why
the work that we discussed at the EU Council in Valletta on
Friday is so important.
The right hon. Gentleman asked about our relationship with
Greece. We continue to support Greece: we have a number of
experts providing support on the ground, giving the Greeks
real help with the task of dealing with the refugees. I
made a commitment that we would want to continue to
co-operate with our European partners on this issue after
leaving the European Union, because it is indeed not
confined to the European Union; it affects us as a whole,
throughout Europe.
The right hon. Gentleman made a number of comments about
defence. Indeed, he devoted a fair amount of his response
to the whole question of defence. At one point, he said
that the fact that we were spending 2% on defence cast
doubt on the competence of the UK Government in matters
relating to it. I think this is the same right hon.
Gentleman who said that he wanted to send out our nuclear
submarines without any missiles on them. You couldn’t make
it up.
-
Mr (Rushcliffe)
(Con)
I think that, for most states, the main business of the
Council was yet another attempt to tackle the problem of
mass migration from the middle east and north Africa, which
is destabilising the politics of every European country.
Will my right hon. Friend confirm—in fact, I think she just
has—that, as Prime Minister, she will play as active a part
as she did when she was Home Secretary in working with the
other European Union countries to tackle the problem?
Otherwise we shall have a continuing problem of attempts to
come to this country.
If we are going to start returning refugees to the coast of
north Africa, may I ask whether any progress is being made
in the efforts that my right hon. Friend was making when
she was Home Secretary to find somewhere on the other side
of the Mediterranean where Europeans can finance and
organise reception centres and refugees and applicants can
be processed in a civilised way, and where it can be
ensured that only genuine asylum seekers are let into this
country?
-
The Prime Minister
I can give my right hon. and learned Friend those
reassurances. As he has said, this issue will continue to
affect us, and to affect us all. It is not confined to the
borders of the European Union. We will continue to
co-operate with our European partners on this important
matter while we remain in the EU and beyond.
Of course, as my right hon. and learned Friend indicated,
one of the concerns about returning people to north Africa
has related to the conditions to which they would be
returned. That is why the EU has made efforts in Niger to
establish some centres to try to ensure that people do not
progress through to Libya and attempt to cross the
Mediterranean, and it is also why we referred in the
Council conclusions to our support for the Italian
initiative. The Italians have worked with the Government of
National Accord in Libya to secure an agreement that they
will do some work there, in particular to ensure that
people can be returned to suitable conditions, and we will
support that.
-
(Moray) (SNP)
May I begin by joining the Prime Minister and the Leader of
the Labour party in extending to the Queen the best wishes
of my right hon. and hon. Friends on the occasion of her
sapphire jubilee? We wish her a very pleasant day with her
family, and many further jubilees to come.
I thank the Prime Minister for giving me advance sight of
her short statement about what was the first European Union
informal summit since she published her White Paper on
Brexit. It was also the first meeting since she met
colleagues in the Joint Ministerial Committee of the
British-Irish Council, and, of course, the first since her
visit to Dublin.
As we have already established, the Prime Minister wants no
hard borders on these islands; she wants the free movement
of peoples on these islands and the safeguarding and
boosting of trade on these islands, and we on these Benches
wholeheartedly support these aims. But given the great
importance that the Prime Minister gives in the White Paper
to the Union of the United Kingdom and what we are told is
a partnership of equals, she will surely have briefed her
European colleagues while she was in Malta about the
progress of negotiations with the other Governments on
these islands. So did she confirm that she will work with
the Scottish Government to secure continuing membership of
the European single market? Did she tell her European
colleagues that we value EU citizens living in our country,
that their presence will be guaranteed, and that she is
prepared to learn the lessons from Canada, from Australia
and from Switzerland, where it is perfectly possible to
have different immigration priorities and policies within a
unitary state? Did the Prime Minister remind European
colleagues that in Scotland we voted by 62% to remain in
the European Union and that only one Member of Parliament
representing a Scottish constituency voted for her Brexit
legislation?
We are getting to a stage where warm words from the
Government are not enough. It is the member state that is
supposed to negotiate on all of our behalves within the
European Union. Scotland did not warrant a single mention
in the Prime Minister’s statement. She now has the
opportunity to tell us: what Scottish priorities did she
raise at the European summit? Did she raise any at all?
-
The Prime Minister
The right hon. Gentleman is right that I have confirmed our
commitment to the common travel area; I have been
discussing that with the Taoiseach, and officials continued
those discussions. The right hon. Gentleman referenced EU
citizens; as I said in my statement and in response to the
Leader of the Opposition, in the United Kingdom we all
value the contribution that EU citizens have made to the
United Kingdom—to our society, to our economy, to our
public services. We want to be able to give them the
reassurance at as early a stage as possible of their
continuation. As the UK Government, of course we have a
duty to consider UK citizens living in other EU states as
well and, as I have said, it has been clear that there is
good will on all sides in relation to this matter, but
there is an expectation that this will be considered in the
round and that we can look at EU citizens here and UK
citizens in other member states.
The right hon. Gentleman also asked a number of questions
about what I was putting forward to the European leaders of
the 27. Of course, what I was putting forward was the views
of the United Kingdom. It is the UK that will be
negotiating; we listen, we take account of, and we
incorporate views of Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales,
but when I am sitting there around the EU Council, I am
doing so as the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
-
Sir (Stone) (Con)
Did my right hon. Friend observe that after she had spoken
to the 27 they were far more realistic, particularly with
respect to the question of defence and NATO, than they had
been beforehand, and in particular than in respect of
Donald Tusk’s letter to the 27, which he sent them on 31
January?
-
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend is absolutely right; there is a growing
recognition among the member states of the European Union
that within NATO it is important to meet the 2% commitment
for expenditure on defence. I am pleased to say that a
small number of other European member states have already
reached that 2% level, but others are actively moving
towards that 2%--most notably, perhaps, some of the Baltic
states.
-
(Leeds Central)
(Lab)
Last spring, in pointing out that we export more to Ireland
than to China and almost twice as much to Belgium as to
India, the Prime Minister said:
“It is not realistic to think we could just replace
European trade with these new markets.”
Can she therefore give the House an assurance that in the
negotiations she will seek to safeguard tariff and
barrier-free access to European markets for British
businesses, if necessary by remaining in the customs union
if that is the only way to ensure this?
-
The Prime Minister
Nobody is talking about replacing European Union trade with
trade around the rest of the world. What we are talking
about is expanding our trade across the world so that we
have a good trading relationship with the European Union
but are also able to sign up to new trade agreements with
other parts of the world. As the right hon. Gentleman
knows, a number of countries are already talking to us
about such potential trade agreements, and we will do what
is necessary to ensure that we can expand trade around the
world, including with the European Union.
-
(Wokingham) (Con)
Is the Prime Minister as shocked as I am that the EU, which
is bound by treaty to the rule of law and human decency, is
unable to offer a simple reassurance to all British
citizens living on the continent that they will not face
eviction?
-
The Prime Minister
I think that I am more hopeful than my right hon. Friend,
in that I have every confidence that we will be able to
address this issue as an early discussion within the
negotiations. I would have liked to be able to address it
outside the negotiations but, sadly, some member states did
not wish to do that. However, I think that the goodwill is
there to give that reassurance to EU citizens here and to
UK citizens in Europe.
-
(Normanton, Pontefract
and Castleford) (Lab)
On the customs union, the Prime Minister has said that she
insists on being outside the common external tariff. If the
UK, France and Ireland all have different tariffs on goods
coming in from outside, how will she guarantee to have
barrier-free goods passing between those different
countries? A lot of people cannot see how we can be outside
the common external tariff and have barrier-free trade. If
it comes to that crunch, will she agree to go back into the
customs union and be part of the common external tariff in
order to have barrier-free trade?
-
The Prime Minister
The right hon. Lady is approaching this, as a number of
others have done, as a binary issue between customs union
membership and having a good trade agreement with the
European Union. I do not see it as such. We want to be able
to negotiate free trade agreements with other countries
around the world, but our membership of parts of the
customs union—this is not just a single in or out
question—currently prevents us from doing those free trade
agreements. I am confident that we can achieve the sort of
free trade agreement with the European Union that is in our
interest and that of the European Union and that gives us
the ability to trade across borders that we want in the
future.
-
(Reigate) (Con)
In her statement, my right hon. Friend talked about the new
and equal partnership that we wish to build between the EU
and an independent, self-governing, global Britain. She
also pointed out the importance of co-operation on issues
such as migration from Libya. Were there any discussions
on, and what contemplation is she giving to, Britain’s
continuing de facto involvement in the common foreign and
security policy and the common security and defence policy
after Brexit?
-
The Prime Minister
I can reassure my hon. Friend that this is one of the
issues we are looking at in relation to the negotiations
that are coming up. In the speech that I made at Lancaster
House two and a half weeks ago, I was very clear that we
recognised the importance of the security and defence
co-operation that we have with our European partners and
that we wanted to continue that co-operation.
-
(Westmorland and Lonsdale)
(LD)
I thank the Prime Minister for giving me advance sight of
her statement. I should also like to associate myself and
my colleagues with her congratulations to Her Majesty the
Queen on the occasion of her sapphire jubilee. During the
Prime Minister’s brief walkabout with Angela Merkel—during
which I assume she offered her a state visit—did she raise
the issue of unaccompanied child refugees? Will she now
confirm that the Government will not break the promise,
made by the House nine months ago under the terms of the
Dubs amendment, of a safe future for those children, and
that the scheme will remain open and in use for the rest of
this Parliament in order to offer safe haven to at least
3,000 unaccompanied child refugees?
-
The Prime Minister
I can reassure the hon. Gentleman that the Government are
indeed putting into practice our commitment to give support
to child refugees who have already made it across into
Europe and to bring them to the UK. Many child refugees
have already been brought to the UK under that scheme.
-
Several hon. Members rose—
-
Mr Speaker
Ah yes, the good doctor! I call .
-
(New Forest East)
(Con)
Thank you, Mr Speaker. Given that there can be no security
for Europe without the intimate involvement of the United
States of America, will my right hon. Friend please
redouble her efforts to persuade our continental
friends—and, indeed, our friends on the Opposition
Benches—that, whatever they feel about an individual
President’s personal qualities, the way to proceed has to
be to reach out to him, to respect his office and to keep
strengthening the alliance?
-
The Prime Minister
My right hon. Friend is right. One of the themes at the
informal Council was the recognition of the role that
America has played in supporting Europe’s defence and
security and of the need to engage fully with the American
Administration. That is what we are doing and what I
encourage others to do.
-
(Wolverhampton North
East) (Lab)
I welcome what the Prime Minister said about the importance
of maintaining the sanctions regime on Russia in response
to its actions in Ukraine. Will she reassure the House that
we will, where necessary, continue to agree such sanctions
with our European partners once we leave the European
Union?
-
The Prime Minister
I reassure the hon. Lady that as long we are members of the
European Union we will continue to encourage other member
states to maintain the sanctions. There are several foreign
policy areas, such as on the security of Europe, on which
we will want to co-operate in future with our European
Union partners. Once we are outside the EU, we will not
have a vote around the table on the sanctions regime, but
we will continue to make our views clear.
-
(Lichfield)
(Con)
Contrary to the rather negative comments from the Labour
party, was my right hon. Friend yet again heartened by
Germany? Over the weekend, German Finance Minister Wolfgang
Schäuble said in Der Tagesspiegel that there is no question
of the United Kingdom being punished for leaving the
European Union and that London remains the heart of the
global finance industry. What influence does my right hon.
Friend think Germany will have over the negotiations?
-
Mr Speaker
I am greatly impressed by the range of the hon. Gentleman’s
reading matter.
-
Vielen Dank!
-
The Prime Minister
I was aware of Wolfgang Schäuble’s comments—although I
cannot claim to have read that particular publication—and
it was an important point. As we move forward towards the
triggering of the negotiations, we are now seeing a genuine
willingness on both sides to discuss the future EU-UK
relationship—the new partnership that we want—and a
recognition of the role that the UK plays in Europe. Of
course, Germany will be one of the remaining 27 member
states, but I look forward to having further conversations
with our German counterparts on the importance that they
place on the City of London and the UK’s trading
relationship with Europe.
-
Mr (Wolverhampton South
East) (Lab)
The Prime Minister has guaranteed Parliament a vote on the
final deal between the UK and the EU. Will she confirm that
that commitment applies both to the article 50 divorce
negotiations and to the free trade agreement that she hopes
to negotiate? What happens if Parliament says no to the
terms of either deal?
-
The Prime Minister
We see the negotiations not as being separate but as going
together. The arrangement that we aim to negotiate is a
deal that will cover both the exit arrangements and the
future free trade agreement that we will have the European
Union. I have every confidence that we will be able to get
a good deal agreed with the EU in relation to both those
matters, including our future co-operation not just on
trade but on other matters, and will be able to bring a
good deal here for Parliament to vote on.
-
(Aldershot)
(Con)
I must confess that I am still reeling from the novelty of
the right hon. Member for Islington North (Jeremy Corbyn)
advocating increased defence expenditure. I warmly welcome
him to the clan—we will not tell the Stop the War coalition
about his newfound enthusiasm.
The sooner we can give EU residents here the reassurance
that they seek, the better. Will the Prime Minister tell us
which of our EU partners are so reluctant to offer
reciprocal rights to Her Majesty’s subjects who reside in
their countries?
-
The Prime Minister
I think the whole House was somewhat surprised by the
Leader of the Opposition’s contribution in relation to
defence spending, but we will wait to see whether that is
followed up by commitments in other debates.
On the question of EU nationals, I absolutely agree with my
hon. Friend that it is important that we give that
reassurance as early as possible. It is not a question of
not offering reciprocal rights; it is that some member
states did not want to negotiate part of what they saw as
the fuller negotiations until article 50 has been
triggered. It is article 50 that will trigger our ability
to discuss the matter.
-
Mr (Belfast North)
(DUP)
May I associate my right hon. and hon. Friends with the
Prime Minister’s warm words of congratulation to Her
Majesty the Queen on the occasion of her sapphire jubilee?
Given this country’s enormous contribution to the defence
of Europe and, indeed, the west generally, and given that
we are one of the world’s biggest contributors to
humanitarian and international aid, may I urge the Prime
Minister to use every opportunity in discussions with our
European friends and partners to reiterate the need for
them also to step up to the plate on both those vital
issues, which are just as important as some of the other
issues that we are discussing?
-
The Prime Minister
The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right, and I give
the commitment that I will continue to express to my
European colleagues the importance of their actually
stepping up to the plate and spending the requisite amount
of money on defence. It is important that Europe shows that
commitment.
-
Mrs (Chesham and Amersham)
(Con)
I welcome the Prime Minister’s statement on the informal
Council. In particular, I welcome the £30 million-worth of
new aid for refugees. With recent reports of children, in
particular, returning to the Jungle camp area in Calais,
did she have an opportunity to discuss it with her French
counterpart? What more can be done to prevent children from
returning to that area in the false hope of expecting to
come to the UK?
-
The Prime Minister
My right hon. Friend raises an important issue, and today I
asked the Home Office to look at the particular concern
that people, including children, are now returning to the
camps at Calais. Obviously, the action that will be taken
within France is a matter for the French Government, who
share the concern about the possibility of migrants
returning to the camps at Calais. Obviously, the French
Government have already acted in relation to that matter.
We will continue to operate the schemes that we have been
operating, working with the French Government, to ensure
that those who have a right to be in the United Kingdom are
able to come here.
-
Ms (Ochil and
South Perthshire) (SNP)
What discussions did the Prime Minister have in Malta on
trade deals? She will of course be aware that all Members
of the European Parliament will be able to vote on the
EU-Canada trade deal, but her Government have gone back on
their promise to hold a debate on the Floor of the House.
Given the prominence given to the comprehensive economic
and trade agreement in her very brief Brexit White Paper as
an example of what we can expect from future trade deals,
why are the Government running so scared of parliamentary
scrutiny? This Government are not about taking back control
for the people of the whole country; they are about taking
back control for themselves.
-
The Prime Minister
The CETA deal, as I understand it, will be discussed today
in European Committee B, of which the hon. Lady is a
member. She will therefore be able to contribute to that
debate.
-
(Gainsborough)
(Con)
Further to the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member
for Aldershot (Sir Gerald Howarth) on the issue of acquired
rights, which countries are standing out against an
immediate deal based on reciprocity before the start of
Brexit negotiations? Do those countries include Germany?
-
The Prime Minister
As I said to my hon. Friend the Member for Aldershot (Sir
Gerald Howarth), the issue is whether that should be part
of the formal negotiations. It has been made clear that
there are those who believe it should be part of the
negotiations, and therefore we will be able to consider
this issue with our European colleagues once article 50 has
been triggered.
-
Mr (Exeter) (Lab)
What did the Prime Minister say to her fellow European
leaders about her assessment of the Trump-Putin
relationship, and specifically about Russian interference
in western democracies, including our own?
-
The Prime Minister
Concern has been expressed both at this Council meeting and
at others about the role that Russia is playing, in a
number of ways, with its interference.
-
(Islington South and
Finsbury) (Lab)
By you?
-
The Prime Minister
Yes, Lady Nugee, by me. It is a matter of continuing
concern and will remain a subject of discussion.
-
(The
Cotswolds) (Con)
Does my right hon. Friend think that, in her discussions
with our 27 EU partners, we will be able to negotiate a
reciprocal right for EU citizens living here and for
British citizens living abroad sooner than the two-year
limit set by article 50?
-
The Prime Minister
What I want to see is an agreement about the position of EU
citizens and UK citizens at an early part of the
negotiations, so that we can give them that reassurance up
front and so that it will not be necessary to keep that
agreement with the other 27 member states as part of the
final deal. We need to have that up front at an early
stage, so that we can give people the reassurance that they
not only need but deserve.
-
(Gordon) (SNP)
On 15 July last year, the Prime Minister pledged that she
would not trigger article 50 until she had an agreed “UK
approach” backed by the devolved Administrations. Does she
intend to keep her word?
-
The Prime Minister
I have been very clear: we are having a number of
engagements with the various devolved Administrations,
taking their issues into account. We are currently, as we
agreed at the last Joint Ministerial Committee plenary
session, intensifying the discussions with the Scottish
Government on the issues raised in the Scottish White
Paper. The decision to trigger article 50 is one that this
House has been very clear should be taken. This House voted
overwhelmingly on Second Reading that that should be the
step we take, and we will be doing so on behalf of the UK.
-
Several hon. Members rose—
-
Mr Speaker
I call Sir . [Interruption.] He is
a very good-natured fellow but he was chuntering at me at
precisely the wrong moment. We will forgive him. I thought
he was standing—
-
Sir (New Forest West)
(Con)
I was about to go to an appointment, Mr Speaker.
-
Mr Speaker
The right hon. Gentleman now has the opportunity of an
appointment with the House. I would be astonished if he has
no view to express—it would be a first!
-
Sir
Unsought though it is, I am delighted to have the
opportunity to ask: has there been any discussion hitherto
about the assets of the European Union to which we might
have some claim after 40 years of being a major
contributor?
-
The Prime Minister
I can assure my right hon. Friend that in looking at the
future negotiations, we will be looking at every angle of
the relationship with the European Union.
-
(Leicester East)
(Lab)
May I welcome the €200 million that have been pledged for
the Mediterranean crisis? As the right hon. Lady knows,
3,800 people have travelled from Libya to Italy since 1
January. I ask her to be very careful with regard to the
Libyan coastguard, because there is strong evidence that it
is working with people smugglers to allow these boats to
leave Libyan waters. How much of that money will actually
be used to counter the work of the criminal gangs?
-
The Prime Minister
The work we are doing with the Libyan coastguard is of
course about training its people to be able to do the job
that we all expect them to do and that many of them want to
be able to do. Separately from that, we will be working to
enhance our ability to work across borders and through
international agreements, using things such as joint
investigation teams, to ensure that we are catching these
criminal gangs. We have put some extra effort into this. I
think we have to put even more effort into it in the
future.
-
Sir (Canterbury)
(Con)
I welcome this statement and, in particular, my right hon.
Friend’s comments about refugees. Does she agree that the
work we are doing, both through our development budget and
through our armed forces, to underpin the fragile states of
Lebanon and Jordan is absolutely pivotal and is vastly more
than is being done by the rest of Europe?
-
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend makes a very important point about the
support we have given. We took a very simple view that we
can support more people who have fled from Syria by giving
them humanitarian aid and support in the region than we can
by bringing them to the UK. We will be bringing, and are
bringing, vulnerable people—in particular, vulnerable
Syrian refugees—here to the UK, but we continue to believe,
as the second biggest bilateral donor to the region, that
this is important as well. I continue to commend the work
of Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan in the support that they are
giving to the significant number of refugees they are
supporting.
-
Ms (Birmingham, Edgbaston)
(Lab)
Given President Trump’s talk about renegotiating the Iran
nuclear deal, did the Prime Minister have any opportunity
to discuss, particularly with her French and German
counterparts, how we would respond should the President
pursue this rather foolish route?
-
The Prime Minister
We continue to believe that the Iran nuclear deal was an
important step forward and an important contribution to
stability in the region. We continue to support it.
-
(South Leicestershire)
(Con)
I welcome the Prime Minister’s statement. Mr Speaker, you
will know that the status of EU nationals affects not only
some of my constituents but my family and friends
personally. The Prime Minister has given me, this House and
the country her personal guarantee that she will seek an
early agreement on this issue. I am putting my entire trust
in the Prime Minister to honour that promise. Getting an
early agreement will, in my opinion, be a decisive mark of
her negotiating skills and leadership qualities as our
Prime Minister.
-
The Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend for the trust he is placing in me. I
reassure him not only of my good intentions in this matter
but of the number of my European colleagues to whom I have
spoken about this issue who also recognise its importance,
not only for UK citizens living in their countries but for
their citizens living here in the United Kingdom. We all
want to be able to give that reassurance to people at an
early stage.
-
(Cardiff South and
Penarth) (Lab/Co-op)
On Russia, the Prime Minister made a big point about the
fact that she was communicating with our European
counterparts about President Trump’s intentions on
sanctions. Over the weekend, though, President Trump made a
series of bizarre statements about relations with Russia,
leading one Republican senator to say:
“I don’t understand what the President’s position is on
Russia”.
Does she understand what it is, and has she communicated
that to our European partners?
-
The Prime Minister
From the discussions I have had so far, I think all the
indications are that President Trump feels the need and
wants to engage more with Russia than has happened in the
past. When I spoke to the Republican party in Philadelphia,
the message I gave was that I think it is right to engage,
but my message in relation to Russia is to engage, but
beware.
-
(Gillingham and
Rainham) (Con)
I very much welcome the Prime Minister’s statement.
Paragraph 4 of the conclusions talks about tackling
radicalisation, extremism and terrorism in Libya. Recent
reports from the United States say that there are 6,000
Daesh militants in Libya; is that figure correct? How
effectively are the Government of National Accord, which is
the organisation we support, and the organisation led by
General Haftar working to defeat Daesh?
-
The Prime Minister
Obviously we are doing all we can and working with all
parties that we can in relation to the defeat of Daesh. My
hon. Friend understands the issue very well. He will know
that while steps are being taken in other places—for
example, in Iraq—to take military action against Daesh and
to have an impact on it there, it is important that we do
not see it able to regroup and come forward in other parts
of the world where perhaps there is a vacuum that would
enable it to do that. As he mentioned, underlying it all is
the fact that we need to deal with the ideology. It is not
just about the people at the moment; it is about dealing
with the ideology. That is where the work to deal with
radicalisation is so important.
-
(Nottingham East)
(Lab/Co-op)
Will the Prime Minister answer part of the question on
which my right hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton
South East (Mr McFadden) pressed her? Will she confirm that
Parliament must give its consent in advance to whatever the
new proposed relationship will be, deal or no deal?
-
The Prime Minister
I have been very clear that Parliament will have a vote on
the deal. This is a matter that is going to be discussed in
some detail tomorrow, when the Secretary of State for
Exiting the European Union will be able to set out in more
detail than in response to a single question what the
situation will be.
-
(Newark) (Con)
Further to the question asked by the right hon. Member for
Birmingham, Edgbaston (Ms Stuart), I am sure the Prime
Minister shares my concern about Iran’s ballistic and
cruise missile tests on 29 January. What discussions did
she have with European partners about how we can work with
the Trump Administration to preserve and, if anything,
strengthen the Iranian nuclear deal?
-
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend is right to raise the concerns about the
ballistic missile tests that took place. The overwhelming
message that we took from the informal council in relation
to working with America on a number of issues, including
not only Russia and Ukraine but Iran, was that it is
important for us to engage directly with the American
Administration on these matters and, obviously, make clear
the positions that we hold in Europe.
-
(Carmarthen East and
Dinefwr) (PC)
According to press reports, the Prime Minister’s master
plan of being a post-Brexit bridge between Europe and the
US was not well received. Does she really think it is in
the interests of the British state to be increasingly
isolated from Europe and in the hands of a President who is
taking the United States on a very dangerous journey?
-
The Prime Minister
I have made it clear in a number of my responses today that
it is important that the United States and Europe work
together and co-operate on the many challenges that we
share.
-
(Dover) (Con)
Does my right hon. Friend not agree that, while it is
welcome that the Calais Jungle was dismantled last autumn
and that this country did the right thing by vulnerable
children, it is very important that we work with the French
to prevent the exploitation of children, target the
traffickers, and, in order to ensure that the Jungle does
not reappear this spring, take full action before the first
tent is pitched?
-
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. With his particular
constituency interest, he is very aware of the issues
around migrants being in the camp at Calais and the
pressure that that puts on Dover, particularly when people
are trying to get through to the United Kingdom. We will
make every effort to work with the French Government to
ensure that we do not see a return to the sort of camps
that we saw last year in Calais before they were cleared.
-
(Vauxhall) (Lab)
Is the Prime Minister disappointed that the mantra of
nothing will be agreed until everything is agreed has been
adopted as far as EU citizens in all our countries are
concerned? Is it not possible for her to have an informal
letter with the Prime Ministers of Spain and France to
agree informally, as soon as it is technically possible
after the start of article 50 negotiations, to bring in
that reciprocality?
-
The Prime Minister
It is not the case that people are saying that, in this
particular issue, it can only be agreed at the end of the
deal when everything else is agreed. What they have said is
that they do not believe that negotiations and discussions
on it should not start until article 50 has triggered the
formal negotiations. I have every expectation, from the
good will that I have seen from others, that it will be
possible to get an early agreement on this matter to give
people the reassurance that they need.
-
(North
Herefordshire) (Con)
May I thank the Prime Minister on behalf of my constituents
for raising the 2% defence spending issue, because it makes
them safer? If the Greeks can do it, why can’t the rest?
-
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The four member states
who do it are the United Kingdom, Greece, Poland and
Estonia. I am pleased to say that some of the rest are
making every effort to do it as well, and are progressing
well towards the 2% target.
-
Several hon. Members rose—
-
Mr Speaker
Order. I remember as a Back Bencher in Department of Trade
and Industry questions that the hon. Member for Ilford
South (Mike Gapes) had No. 1, and I rather irreverently
called out, “Get in there, Gapes.” Now is his opportunity.
I call Mr .
-
(Ilford South)
(Lab/Co-op)
Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Prime Minister has referred to
her meeting with President Trump, but she has not mentioned
her meeting with President Erdogan. Did she take the
opportunity to inform other European Union leaders about
those discussions, the 3 million Syrian refugees that
Turkey is having to take and the support, or lack of it,
that President Erdogan feels has come from the EU so far?
Did she also discuss with them the customs union, of which
Turkey is a member?
-
The Prime Minister
As we were discussing the issue of migration, I was able to
make reference to the EU-Turkey deal—indeed, a number of
references were made to it—which has seen the number of
migrants moving from Turkey to Greece being reduced
significantly. When I was in Turkey, I commended the
Turkish Government for the support that they have given to
the 3 million refugees who are in Turkey.
-
(Bath) (Con)
I warmly welcome this Government’s commitment regularly to
come before this House to update Members on the progress of
EU-UK negotiations. Does my right hon. Friend agree that
the European Council statements are a perfect opportunity
to update the House on the Prime Minister’s negotiations
with EU national leaders after we trigger article 50?
-
The Prime Minister
The EU Council statements are given in response to business
that is done at the EU Council. I can assure my hon. Friend
that there will be every opportunity for Parliament to be
kept informed as we go through this process. There have
already been 70 debates or statements on this issue in
Parliament and 30 reviews by different parliamentary
Committees on different aspects of Brexit. I think I can
say that not a day has gone by since the referendum that
this issue has not been discussed in this House in some
shape or form.
-
(Glasgow Central)
(SNP)
Annette Street Primary School in my constituency is
wonderfully diverse, as many new Scots have made Glasgow
their home. Saqib from Annette Street says:
“There are lots of children from Annette Street that are
from Europe. We want to know if they will have to leave or
not.”
Saying “as soon as possible” is not a good enough answer
for Saqib, Prime Minister—. when we will actually know
whether these children will get to stay in Scotland?
-
The Prime Minister
I repeat the answer that I have given to others: I expect
to be able to deal with this issue in relation to those who
are from the European Union and living here in the United
Kingdom at an early stage in the negotiations. There is
good will on all sides to be able to address the issue when
the negotiations have been triggered because everybody
understands the concern that people have about their
future.
-
Mr (Isle of Wight)
(Con)
Might I ask the Prime Minister which are more
important—Europeans in Britain or Brits in the EU?
-
The Prime Minister
It is not a question of which are more important. We
recognise that there are people from European Union member
states who have made their lives—for some, over a
significant period of time—here in the United Kingdom. I
also recognise that there are UK citizens who have made
their lives in other European Union member states. I want
all those people to be able to carry on living where they
choose to live in the security of knowing that their future
is determined and that the choice is up to them. I want to
ensure that that opportunity and reassurance are given to
all those people, and I hope and expect that we will be
able do that at an early stage of the negotiations.
-
(Bishop Auckland)
(Lab)
The Prime Minister said that the other European Union
member states welcomed the clarity of her objectives. Did
she have any discussion with them about the realism of
completing the substantive negotiations within 18 months?
-
The Prime Minister
I have every expectation—indeed, a number of comments have
been made by others around Europe about the importance of
ensuring this—that we can do this deal and complete these
negotiations within the timescale set.
-
(South Cambridgeshire)
(Con)
I can see that the Prime Minister is genuinely and
sincerely disappointed not to have been able to reassure EU
citizens ahead of the formal negotiations. In the light of
the rapidly shifting landscape—for example, Trump’s
divisive immigration policies and how that situation is
making people in this country feel—if the deal with fellow
nations is not done as early in the negotiation period as
the Prime Minister would like, will she review it again and
look at a unilateral agreement for those EU citizens?
-
The Prime Minister
I recognise the concern that my hon. Friend has shown for
some considerable time on the position of EU citizens
living here in the United Kingdom. I have every
expectation, given the responses that I have had so far
from other member states, that we will indeed be able to
get that reassurance at an early stage. I want and intend
to be able to reassure people from other EU member states
who are living here in the United Kingdom, and I have every
expectation that we will be able to get that reassurance at
an early stage of the negotiations.
-
(Walthamstow)
(Lab/Co-op)
In the Prime Minister’s Lancaster House speech, she put on
her wish list an entirely new form of membership of the
customs union: an associate membership. Did she raise the
idea with the other members of the European Council this
weekend, and quite what did they make of it?
-
The Prime Minister
What I actually did in my Lancaster House speech was to say
that I had not come to a firm decision as to whether the
future relationship should be an associate membership or
some other sort of relationship with the customs union. I
was clear that we need to be able to negotiate trade deals
with other countries around the world.
-
(Boston and Skegness)
(Con)
My constituency contains proportionately more EU nationals
than any other, and they say two things to me—that they
deeply want their rights in this country to be reassured,
and that they understand that it is vital that this country
is the kind of country that also stands up for the
interests of its citizens abroad. Does the Prime Minister
agree that this is a test of national character and that
although the politics may be hard, it is the only option we
can reasonably pursue?
-
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend is right. We should be clear that we have a
duty to consider UK citizens who have chosen to make their
life outside the UK and live in other European Union member
states, as well as having a duty to consider EU citizens
living here in the United Kingdom. That is why I expect
that we will, at an early stage, be able to give
reassurance to both.
-
(Carshalton and Wallington)
(LD)
With how many EU leaders at this Council or earlier
Councils since 23 June did the Prime Minister discuss the
UK staying in the single market post-Brexit?
-
The Prime Minister
What I have been clear about with all the European leaders
I have spoken to is that what we want when we leave the
European Union is a good free trade arrangement with the
member states of the European Union, in the form of the
European Union. That is what we want, and that is what we
will be working for.
-
(Pontypridd) (Lab)
The summit began with the German Chancellor admonishing the
Prime Minister for the threat to undercut our European
neighbours—the alternative economic model the Prime
Minister talked about at Lancaster House. Could she confirm
that she is still threatening to cut corporation tax in a
race to the bottom, and could she tell us whether she is
worried that the manner of the negotiations is damaging our
reputation abroad?
-
The Prime Minister
What I set out in the Lancaster House speech were my 12
objectives for the negotiations. Within that was a new free
trade agreement with the European Union and a belief that
we have every opportunity and every possibility of getting
the arrangement that we want for the future strength of the
UK economy. What I also said very clearly was that we would
not be wanting to sign up to a bad deal for the UK. I think
the UK public want to hear from their Prime Minister that
we are not willing to sign up to a bad deal, and will make
every effort and expect to get the best deal possible for
the United Kingdom.
-
(Tonbridge and Malling)
(Con)
rose—
-
Mr Speaker
Order. Was the hon. Member for Tonbridge and Malling
present at the start of the statement?
-
Absolutely.
-
Mr Speaker
And he has remained throughout?
-
(Tonbridge and Malling)
(Con)
Absolutely, Mr Speaker.
-
Mr Speaker
Then he may speak.
-
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Would my right hon. Friend confirm that the UK is
absolutely at the heart of Europe in defence terms? Did she
get agreement from partners at the European Council that
our alliance with countries such as Denmark and Estonia
very much demonstrates that we are far more influential in
some of the other areas of European policy than is often
recognised?
-
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend makes a very important point. Of course, the
role that the UK plays in the defence of Europe as a whole
is recognised widely across Europe, and I have been very
clear that we want to continue to co-operate on matters
such as defence with our European allies once we have left
the EU.
-
(Kirkcaldy and
Cowdenbeath) (SNP)
The Prime Minister indicated that she speaks on behalf of
the whole United Kingdom, which she will know is a
differentiated Union, with Scotland having its own legal
and education system. What issues, therefore, did she
specifically raise in relation to Scotland’s requirements?
-
The Prime Minister
I hate to disappoint the hon. Gentleman, but the answer I
will give him is the same answer that I gave earlier: when
I go into the European Council, and when we go into these
negotiations, the European Union will be negotiating with
the UK, and the Government will be negotiating on behalf of
the whole of the United Kingdom.
-
Mr (Delyn) (Lab)
The Prime Minister rightly mentioned people trafficking and
sexual exploitation in her statement. Did she give any
reassurances, or did she get any reassurances from her
European partners, on the UK’s continued membership of the
means of exchanging information, such as Europol?
-
The Prime Minister
As I think the right hon. Gentleman knows, that will be a
matter, of course, for the negotiations, but as I said in
my Lancaster House speech, one of the objectives that we
will set is our continuing co-operation on justice and
security matters.
-
(Rutherglen and
Hamilton West) (SNP)
It has been reported that, at the EU Council meeting on
Friday, Angela Merkel, among other leaders, was less than
impressed with the Prime Minister’s threat to turn the UK
into a tax haven. Can the Prime Minister outline exactly what
her EU counterparts said to her regarding that and whether
she intends to take that threat off the table?
-
The Prime Minister
As I said in response to an earlier question on this matter,
what I have done is very clearly to set out—I think it is
absolutely right, and this clarity has been welcomed by other
European leaders—that we expect to get a good deal in our
negotiations with the European Union, and that includes a
good deal on a free trade agreement, and that we will not be
prepared to sign up to a bad deal.
-
(Cardiff West)
(Lab)
My constituents Mr and Mrs Regan came to see me on Saturday
about their son, who has a Greek wife and who lives and works
in the middle east. After Brexit, they plan to come and live
in the UK. Will their daughter-in-law have to apply for a
settlement visa? I said I could not answer that question and
that I would ask someone who could, so could the Prime
Minister answer it for me?
-
The Prime Minister
I take it from the hon. Gentleman’s question that he is
talking about somebody who is currently living outside the
United Kingdom. The arrangements in relation to the movement
of EU citizens into the UK from elsewhere after Brexit are,
of course, matters that the Home Office is currently looking
at, and they will be subject to discussion by Parliament.
-
(Glasgow North West)
(SNP)
I welcome the Prime Minister’s statement on the importance of
EU nationals, but does she understand the damage that is
caused when we continue to use EU nationals, including those
working in highly skilled areas and STEM—science, technology,
engineering and maths—businesses, as bargaining chips in our
negotiations?
-
The Prime Minister
We want to be able to provide reassurance to people who are
EU citizens living here in the UK, and to provide that
reassurance also to EU citizens living elsewhere in Europe. I
remind the hon. Lady that during the Scottish independence
referendum the First Minister told EU nationals that they
would lose the right to stay here if the—[Interruption.]
-
Mr Speaker
Order. All this finger-wagging at the Prime Minister is
rather unseemly. It does not constitute statesmanship of the
highest order. The question has been asked, the Prime
Minister is going to answer, and that answer must be heard
with courtesy.
-
The Prime Minister
The First Minister said that they would lose the right to
stay here if the EU did not allow an independent Scotland to
rejoin, and of course the EU made it very clear that Scotland
could not consider that it was going to get automatic
membership of the European Union.
-
(City of Chester)
(Lab)
Were there any discussions at the Council about reports of
the likely appointment by President Trump of Mr Ted Malloch
as his ambassador to the European Union? Would such an
appointment cause concern to the Prime Minister, since Mr
Malloch has reportedly likened the European Union to the
Soviet Union?
-
The Prime Minister
I have been very clear that it is in the interests of the UK
to have a continuing strong European Union, and that is a
point that I have made to the American Administration.
-
(Kilmarnock and Loudoun)
(SNP)
My wife is an EU national, and unlike the hon. Member for
South Leicestershire (Alberto Costa), neither she nor I have
any faith in this Government doing the right thing unless we
see actions on the rights of EU nationals rather than
so-called warm words. If the Prime Minister sees herself as a
leader, why does she not confirm the rights of EU nationals?
That would also send a positive message to UK citizens living
in other EU countries rather than their having to be a
bargaining chip.
-
The Prime Minister
I have been very clear about my intentions in relation to EU
nationals living here in the United Kingdom, but it is only
right and proper that the United Kingdom Government should
also have a care for the UK citizens living in the European
Union.
-
(Cumbernauld,
Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East) (SNP)
At the summit the Prime Minister announced support to allow
up to 22,000 people to reunite with family members they have
become separated from during their journey. Can she say a
little more about what this means in practice and, in
particular, whether it includes extra efforts towards
reuniting refugees with family members in the United Kingdom?
-
The Prime Minister
For those who are in member states of the European Union, the
Dublin regulations obviously allow for reuniting families
under certain circumstances. That is something we have been
actively working on. Over the past year or so, we have
actively worked with the French Government to increase the
speed at which we are able to reunite children with families
here in the United Kingdom, and we continue to do so.
-
(Paisley and
Renfrewshire North) (SNP)
We are constantly told by Ministers at the Dispatch Box that
they are maintaining close relationships with countries that
have dubious human rights records, allowing us to speak to
those regimes as only friends can. Can the Prime Minister
therefore tell us, given our extra-special, super-duper
relationship with the US, what particular home truths on
Trump’s outrageous plans she delivered on our behalf?
-
The Prime Minister
I was very clear about the UK’s position on a whole range of
issues that we wish to discuss with the United States
Administration. It was the special relationship that enabled
us very quickly to ensure that UK citizens were not covered
by the ban and the Executive order that President Trump
brought into place in relation to the movement of people from
seven countries into the United States.
-
(South Dorset)
(Con)
May I entirely concur with my right hon. Friend’s comments so
far as the Queen is concerned, and add my congratulations to
Her Majesty? I wonder whether any EU leader said to her
during her meeting how envious they are of having such a
wonderful Head of State.
-
The Prime Minister
I seriously say to my hon. Friend that I regularly hear
comments from other leaders, not just in Europe but in other
parts of the world, about how impressive Her Majesty the
Queen is, about her dedication to this country, and about how
lucky we are to have her as our Head of State.
-
The Lord Privy Seal (Baroness Evans of Bowes Park)
(Con)
My Lords, with the leave of the House, I shall now
repeat a Statement made by my right honourable friend
the Prime Minister in another place. The Statement is
as follows.
“Mr Speaker, before I turn to the European Council, I
am sure the whole House will want to join me in sending
our congratulations to Her Majesty the Queen as she
marks her Sapphire Jubilee today. It is testament to
Her Majesty’s selfless devotion to the nation that she
is not marking becoming our first Monarch to reign for
65 years with any special celebration, but instead by
getting on with the job to which she has dedicated her
life. On behalf of the whole country, I am proud to
offer Her Majesty our humble thanks for a lifetime of
extraordinary service. Long may she continue to reign
over us all.
Turning to last week’s informal European Council in
Malta, Britain is leaving the European Union but we are
not leaving Europe—and a global Britain that stands
tall in the world will be a Britain that remains a good
friend and ally to all our European partners. So at
this summit, we showed how Britain will continue to
play a leading role in Europe long after we have left
the EU, in particular through our contribution to the
challenge of managing mass migration, through our
special relationship with America and through the new
and equal partnership that we want to build between the
EU and an independent, self-governing, global Britain.
Let me take each point in turn.
First, on migration, the discussion focused in
particular on the route from Libya across the central
Mediterranean. As I have argued, we need a
comprehensive and co-ordinated approach, and that is
exactly what this Council agreed. This includes working
hard in support of an inclusive political settlement to
stabilise Libya, which will not only help to tackle
migration flows, but to counter terrorism. It means
working to reduce the pull factors that encourage
people to risk their lives, building the capacity of
the Libyans to return migrants to their own shores,
treat them with dignity and help them return home. It
means looking beyond Libya and moving further upstream,
including by urgently implementing the EU’s external
investment plan to help create more opportunities in
migrants’ home countries and by helping genuine
refugees to claim asylum in the first safe country they
reach. It also means better distinguishing between
economic migrants and refugees, swiftly returning those
who have no right to remain and thereby sending out a
deterrence message to others thinking of embarking on
perilous journeys. The Council agreed action in all of
these areas.
Britain is already playing a leading role in the region
and at this summit I announced further steps, including
additional support for the Libyan coastguard and more
than £30 million of new aid for the most vulnerable
refugees across Greece, the Balkans, Egypt, Tunisia,
Morocco, Algeria, Sudan and Libya. Britain is also
setting up an £8 million special protection fund to
keep men, women and children in the Mediterranean
region safe from trafficking, sexual violence and
labour exploitation as part of our commitment to tackle
modern slavery. The Council agreed with my call that we
should do everything possible to deter this horrific
crime, including by introducing tough penalties for
those who trade in human misery and by working together
to secure the necessary evidence for prosecutions that
can put these criminals behind bars where they belong.
Turning to America, I opened a discussion on engaging
the new Administration, and I was able to relay the
conversation I had with President Trump at the White
House about the important history of co-operation
between the United States and the countries of Europe.
In particular, I confirmed that the President had
declared his 100% commitment to NATO as the cornerstone
of our security in the West. But I also made clear that
every country needs to share the burden and play its
full part, meeting the NATO target of spending 2% on
defence. It is only by investing properly in our
defence that we can ensure we are properly equipped to
keep our people safe.
I was also able to relay my discussions with President
Trump on the importance of maintaining the sanctions
regime on Russia in response to its actions in Ukraine.
I very much welcome the strong words last week from the
new US ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley,
in confirming America’s continued support for these
sanctions.
Of course, there are some areas where we disagree with
the approach of the new Administration, and we should
be clear about those disagreements and about the values
that underpin our response to the global challenges
that we face. I also argued at the Council, however,
that we should engage patiently and constructively with
America as a friend and ally—an ally that has helped
guarantee the longest period of peace that Europe has
ever known. We should be clear that the alternative of
division and confrontation would only embolden those
who would do us harm, wherever they may be.
Finally, on Brexit, European leaders welcomed the
clarity of the objectives that we have set out for the
negotiation ahead. They warmly welcomed our ambition to
build a new partnership between Britain and the
European Union that is in the interests of both sides.
They also welcomed the recognition that we in Britain
want to see a strong and successful European Union,
because that is in our interests and the interests of
the whole world.
On the issue of acquired rights, the general view was
that we should reach an agreement which applied equally
to the other 27 member states and the UK, which is why
we think a unilateral decision from the UK is not the
right way forward. As I have said before, however, EU
citizens living in the UK make a vital contribution to
our economy and our society, and without them we would
be poorer and our public services weaker. So we will
make securing the reciprocal agreement that will
guarantee their status a priority as soon as the
negotiations begin, and I want to see this agreed as
soon as possible, because that is in everyone’s
interests.
Our European partners now want to get on with the
negotiations. So do I, and so does this House, which
last week voted by a majority of 384 in support of the
Government triggering Article 50. There are, of course,
further stages for the Bill in Committee and in the
other place, and it is right that this process should
be completed properly, but the message is clear to all:
this House has spoken, and now is not the time to
obstruct the democratically expressed wishes of the
British people. It is time to get on with leaving the
European Union and building an independent,
self-governing, global Britain. I commend this
Statement to the House”.
4.48 pm
-
(Lab)
My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for repeating the
Statement today and concur with her congratulations to
Her Majesty the Queen on her 65th anniversary as the
nation’s monarch. I hope that Her Majesty is able to
commemorate the event in some way, but I suspect for
her that this is an anniversary also tinged with
sadness at the loss of her father. He endeared himself
to the nation, and his early death was a terrible
shock. She had not expected to be Queen at such a young
age. That was at a time of great change in the world,
which is also the case today. It was also a time when,
following the war, there were many refugees across
Europe. Here we are, 65 years later, and with yet
another European summit discussing how to prevent
further refugees and mass migration, this time from the
Middle East and north Africa.
The Statement talks about the pull factors that lead to
people seeking safety and a better life away from their
homes. We should always keep in our mind the
desperation that leads people to risk their lives and
those of their families in leaving their homeland,
often leaving behind all their possessions, other
family and friends, and often paying large amounts to
criminals. In looking at the push factors too, can I
ask the noble Baroness about the EU external investment
plan? The Statement refers to creating more
opportunities in migrants’ home countries. Can she
expand on that? I am not sure of the details at all. Is
it limited to economy and employment opportunities or
is it more linked to security? It would be helpful to
have some more information and also to know how it is
going to be implemented and monitored, and how success
will be measured.
Can the noble Baroness say more about the conversations
the Prime Minister had with President Trump when she
was at the White House? She said she was able to relay
the conversations that she had with the President on
the relationship between the USA and European
countries. I think we are all quite interested in that
conversation and would be interested to hear more. The
Prime Minister’s assurance that the President had
declared his 100% support from NATO was particularly
welcome, but we have not yet heard it from his own
lips—or, perhaps more importantly, from his own Twitter
account. What was the response from her European
colleagues on this point?
The Minister had a number of side meetings but
apparently not with the German Chancellor Angela
Merkel, as they were able to discuss their issues
informally in the margins outside the arranged
meetings. Those all-important private discussions can
be very productive in building relationships and being
frank and open with European leaders, so it makes the
situation even more difficult that the Prime Minister
then had to pack her bags and leave while the remaining
27 countries further considered other issues relating
to the EU that we cannot be part of. What plans do the
Government have to ensure that we do not lose out by
not being at the table, not just for the formal parts
of the meeting where they are discussing the EU post
Brexit but for those informal discussions that lead to
trust and develop the relationships that will be
all-important as we move forward?
Malta has been a close and important ally of the UK
over many years; it is the only instance of an entire
country being awarded the George Cross. Obviously it is
important that we maintain what we would call that
“special relationship”, so what are the Government’s
plans to ensure that that relationship continues post
Brexit? The Prime Minister met the Prime Minister of
Spain. Did she discuss Gibraltar, and had she met the
Gibraltarian First Minister before she was able to
raise any such issues with the Spanish Prime Minister?
On the issue of EU citizens, I do not think today’s
Statement gives anything like the reassurance they
require so that they can continue with their lives,
their jobs, their homes and their families in this
country. It is in the Prime Minister’s gift to say so.
Even UKIP said so on television yesterday, so why the
Prime Minister cannot make such a commitment I have no
idea. It is about time we heard something stronger from
the Prime Minister on this issue.
The section in the Statement regarding Brexit says the
European leaders,
“warmly welcomed our ambition to build a new
partnership between Britain and the European Union that
is in the interests of both sides. They also welcomed
the recognition that we in Britain want to see a strong
and successful European Union”.
I hope that is not an overoptimistic view. We have some
tough negotiations ahead in which we have to get the
best possible deal that we can in the interests of the
UK and UK citizens. If there is any complacency at all
that these negotiations are going to be easy, I do not
see how we can get the best deal. I hope the noble
Baroness can assure me that this is not an
overoptimistic view and that there is awareness of the
difficult discussions and negotiations that are going
to take place.
On the last part of the Statement, I am sure I am not
the only one in your Lordships’ House who is getting
tired of the Government going on and on about not
“obstructing”—I think that is the latest phrase—“the
democratically expressed wishes of the British people”.
I do not know how many times this has to be said about
blocking, obstructing, wrecking or whatever is the
latest word the Prime Minister has found in her
thesaurus. I say to the noble Baroness that asking
questions and making suggestions for amendment is not
blocking, obstructing or wrecking; it is called
parliamentary democracy. That should be welcomed by the
Government because that is the way in which we will get
the best deal, not just by accusing people who ask
questions of blocking. I do not know why those who are
in charge of the negotiations are so frightened of
questions because time and again we hear that only by
questioning and scrutiny do we get better legislation,
and that is all this House would ever seek to do.
-
(LD)
My Lords, I join the Prime Minister and the Leader of
the House by congratulating the Queen on her Sapphire
Jubilee—a truly remarkable achievement.
With every passing Council meeting, we see the
influence of Great Britain and the Prime Minister
diminishing. In October, she made a five-minute speech
at 1 o’clock in the morning. In December she was
pictured standing alone, desperately looking for
someone to talk to. This time, she was rebuffed as she
offered to act as a bridge between Europe and the USA.
One does not need to be an engineer to know that, to be
sustainable, a bridge needs firm foundations on both
sides of the stream. At the moment the UK is
demolishing one set of foundations—namely, those on the
European side of the stream—and therefore is it
surprising that countries within the EU, from the
largest to the smallest, have treated with almost total
disdain the Prime Minister’s suggestion that, in our
new semi-detached state, we might act as a bridge?
One of the more useful parts of the Prime Minister’s
visit to Malta might have been the formal meeting on
her agenda with the Chancellor of Germany. Could the
Leader of the House explain why that formal meeting was
cancelled? Admittedly, the two of them did chat briefly
while walking down the street, but frankly that does
not constitute a sensible degree of conversation with
the most important of our EU partners. Will the noble
Baroness say what plans the Prime Minister has to have
a substantive discussion with Angela Merkel, to make
good the fact that they had very little time, while
walking down the street on a sunny day in Valletta, to
talk about anything of great substance? This was an
extremely short visit by the Prime Minister. As at
previous Council meetings, she had to leave after the
pudding and probably even before the coffee was served.
Not surprisingly, perhaps, she was not present as the
other leaders of the EU discussed how they might make
preparations for the 60th anniversary of the Treaty of
Rome. Will the Leader of the House say whether she
expects the UK Government to be represented at those
celebrations when they eventually take place, and if
so, by whom?
The most substantive part of the discussions in Malta
were about migration from Libya. We welcome the fact
that it was possible to make progress, and the Prime
Minister takes great satisfaction from the fact that
she played a significant part in those negotiations.
May I echo the question asked by the noble Baroness,
Lady Smith, about how the Government expect to play
such an important, useful part in future, when they are
not even at the table at which those discussions take
place? Of course, the vast bulk of the refugees from
Libya is going to Italy. We have discussed before in
your Lordships’ House the extent to which her Majesty’s
Government are making good their commitment under the
Dubs amendment to bring child refugees who find
themselves in Italy to the UK. I apologise if I have
got the figure wrong, but I think that when it was last
discussed the Government said one person from the Home
Office had been sent to Italy to help in that process.
Will the noble Baroness confirm whether that is indeed
the case, whether she thinks that to be an adequate
response to this humanitarian crisis, and how many
children have come to the UK from Italy under the
provisions of the Dubs amendment?
Finally, on Brexit and the vexed question of acquired
rights, many people in the country just do not
understand the Government’s attitude in denying EU
citizens living in the UK the knowledge that they will
be able to remain post Brexit. The Government seem to
be unaware of the crisis that is developing as a result
of this policy. Those who saw the BBC news in London
will have seen what is happening to the recruitment of
EU staff into hospitals in London. Again, I will be
corrected if I am wrong, but I think that the figure
given of the number of nurses coming to London
hospitals has, since last year, fallen by approximately
90% That is an extraordinarily worrying phenomenon,
given that we are far from meeting the staffing
requirements that the NHS has set itself, and it is by
no means clear where else the Government expect those
nursing numbers to be made up.
One reason why people are unwilling to come at the
moment is because they feel that the attitude of the
Government in respect of existing EU citizens gives
them no confidence that they will be welcome. Another
is that they have no sense of how the rules are going
to operate in future. So while the Government have many
things about which they do not want to give a detailed
account, could they say how they intend to approach the
question of migration from the EU of people whose
skills we need—whether they are the brightest and the
best, at a very high skill level, whether they are
medium-skilled people or whether they are the kind of
people whom we will require in future to enable our
agricultural, horticultural and hospitality sectors to
survive and prosper?
-
I am sorry to start on a discordant note, but I am
afraid that I disagree with the noble Lord’s assessment
of the Prime Minister’s role at the summit. In fact, it
showed that, once again, while we are a member of the
EU, we will continue to play a full part. The Prime
Minister opened the discussion on migration and was
specifically asked to lead the discussion over lunch
about the new American Administration. That is quite
clear evidence that, while we remain in the EU, we will
continue to play a central role in discussions. As I
have said, we will also continue to make sure that we
have a strong relationship with our EU partners as we
go forward.
On some of the other comments and questions raised, the
noble Baroness, Lady Smith, asked about the EU’s
external investment plan which, as she will know, was
agreed in late 2016. It is now being considered by the
European Parliament, and we are eager for it to be
implemented as soon as possible. It is focused on
creating economic opportunities in countries of origin
and transit to reduce push factors.
The noble Baroness also asked about the conversations
that the Prime Minister had about NATO. While I cannot
speak for the President’s Twitter account, I can say
that the Prime Minister was quite clear that she did
get confirmation from President Trump that he is 100%
behind NATO, and this was very much welcomed by our
European partners.
On the Prime Minister’s discussions with Chancellor
Angela Merkel, part of the reason why they were able to
have full and frank discussions during the walkabout
was that the initial meeting on migration finished
quite early, so they had more time. As two women who
get to the point, it is quite a good sign of the
positive relationship that they have that they can
discuss what they need to in a timely fashion.
Both the noble Baroness and the noble Lord asked about
our relationship with the EU. Once again, I can say
that we are absolutely committed to maintaining good
relations with our EU partners; we want the best deal
for Britain and the UK, and we believe that it is only
right that the 27 continue to discuss their approach to
our negotiations. We want to make sure that both sides
have the most fruitful negotiations that we can, and
they need to prepare for it just as we are preparing
for it in this country.
On the status of EU nationals living in the UK and UK
nationals living abroad, as we have said, we are very
keen to try to come to an agreement as soon as we can.
In conversations with EU leaders, they have made it
very clear that they want to discuss the status of
nationals as part of the negotiations. There is good
will on all sides, and I believe that the readout of
some of the conversations that the Prime Minister had
with the Prime Minister of Spain shows that. That is
the position that the EU leaders have taken and one
that we have to respect, but it is certainly a
priority, and the Prime Minister once again showed that
by raising it with her counterparts.
I assure the noble Baroness that we are all very clear
that discussions and negotiations will be difficult and
challenging, but we believe and are confident that it
is in in the interests of the EU and of this country to
come to the best deal that we can. We are starting from
a strong position of wanting the best for the EU and
for this country, so we are confident that we will get
to a deal that we can all be happy with.
In terms of parliamentary scrutiny, the noble Baroness
and all noble Lords will be aware that there has not
been a sitting day since the referendum when Parliament
has not discussed, debated or scrutinised Brexit in one
form or another. There have been 70 parliamentary
debates already on Brexit, as well as over 30 Select
Committee inquiries. We understand and want the
scrutiny of Parliament and Parliament’s involvement in
helping with these negotiations. As I have said, I
think that we are making good progress on that already.
-
(Con)
My Lords, before we proceed to Back-Bench questions, I
invite your Lordships to observe the normal rotational
pattern of posing questions to try and ensure fairness
of opportunity across the Chamber.
5.05 pm
-
(Con)
My Lords, I very much welcome the Statement and, in
particular, the congratulations that were offered to
Her Majesty. I also welcome the very robust response
that the noble Baroness gave. Does she agree that there
seems to be a delusion in the other place, and maybe
even in parts of this House, that ahead lies some
neatly tied-up and bundled bespoke deal that will
comprehensively cover all of our problems? Would it not
be better to explain at this stage that we will see a
whole range of sector-specific trade deals? For
example, there will be deals on defence—such as those
the Prime Minister addressed in Malta—on migrants and
refugees, and on crime. These are all practical
arrangements, which will be required in order to build
a new relationship with the European Union and other
independent states. Would it not be better to explain
this than for us to believe that a marvellous, complete
deal will emerge after the negotiations? It will not.
-
I thank my noble friend for that question. I think that
we are all under no illusion about the breadth and
depth of the relationship we have with Europe at the
moment and the scope of the negotiations. Some areas
will no doubt be easier to come to an agreed position
on than others, but we are determined to go in with a
positive and optimistic frame of mind and to achieve a
deal that works best for this country. We believe that
our European partners will want to work with us to
ensure that we create a new and positive partnership
for both sides.
-
(Lab)
My Lords, did the Prime Minister, in her introduction
to the European Council on the relationship with the
United States, or in her walk with the Chancellor of
Germany around the streets of Valletta, congratulate
Mrs Merkel on her telephone call with President Trump,
in which Mrs Merkel very clearly said that we all have
to respect our international obligations to refugees?
Did the Prime Minister not feel a certain sense of
shame that, in her own encounter with President Trump
in the White House, she did not have the courage to
make that point when he told her of his impending
executive orders?
-
The Prime Minister has been very clear that we believe
the ban is divisive and wrong and that it is absolutely
not a policy that we would pursue. She had a good
conversation with Chancellor Merkel which covered a
whole range of issues.
-
(CB)
My Lords, when the Prime Minister introduced her White
Paper and Lancaster House speech—the Statement said
that it was welcomed, particularly the reference to a
new partnership, which I think is a very good label to
give it—did her colleagues indicate whether they would
start negotiating on the new partnership as soon as
Article 50 is triggered, or do they still hold to the
Commission’s point of view that the negotiations on
divorce have to come first and that the other
negotiation can only be consecutive? Secondly, did she
find that all 27 of her colleagues agreed with the view
held by herself and the Home Secretary that President
Trump’s travel ban is not only wrong but also
extraordinarily likely to lead to increased
radicalisation in Muslim countries, which can only put
European countries at greater risk?
-
As I said in the Statement, the Prime Minister has said
that our European partners want to get on with the
negotiations. We all want to move on so that we can
come to a good deal. As I have also said, we have been
very clear that we believe the ban is divisive and
wrong.
-
(LD)
My Lords, will the noble Baroness the Leader of the
House, whom I thank for repeating the Statement, tell
us what words President Trump used when he gave his
commitment to NATO? My understanding is that the Prime
Minister said that he gave a 100% commitment to NATO,
but I have not seen the words used by President Trump.
It is rather similar to the occasion when Mr Gove asked
the President whether Britain would be high up in the
queue for a trade agreement. I do not think that I saw
the words used. This is more than quibbling, because we
need to know what the real commitment and intentions of
the President of the United States are. Secondly, will
the noble Baroness explain why it is a sequitur that,
because we want an agreement with the 27 on acquired
rights, the UK cannot therefore make a unilateral start
on that? I suggest that that is just another pretext.
If the UK showed good will by giving a unilateral
guarantee, which morally and economically is the right
thing to do, that would be the basis for an agreement.
As the noble Baroness well knows, there is cross-party
support in this House and way beyond it for the
Government to do that rather than keep finding new
excuses.
-
As I was not in the room when President Trump and the
Prime Minister had a conversation, I cannot give the
noble Baroness a verbatim account. However, I can tell
her what the Prime Minister has told us: that President
Trump confirmed that he was 100% behind NATO. I believe
that he nodded and agreed with that when he was
standing at his podium. However, I am afraid that I was
not there any more than she was.
As I have said, I cannot say any more about the
situation regarding the status of EU nationals. We have
been very clear that this is a priority for us and that
we want to come to an agreement as quickly as possible.
However, we also have to respect the position of our EU
partners. We will try to address this issue very
quickly. The Prime Minister has been extremely clear,
as have I and all my Front Bench colleagues, that we
hugely value the contribution of EU citizens here, and
that this is a priority for us.
-
(UKIP)
My Lords, further to that point, the Statement says
that the general view was that mutual recognition
should take place. Which of the 27 member states do not
agree with that? Is it not rather depressing that the
Prime Minister has already made weeks ago an offer of
mutual recognition for their 3.5 million-plus people
living here and our 1.2 million people living there? Is
it not very disappointing that they have not already
agreed that? On the question of NATO, could the noble
Baroness tell us which of the EU nations are actually
refusing to pay their 2% of GDP? Is not President Trump
quite right in insisting that they should?
-
As I have said, we believe there is good will on all
sides to look at the status of both EU nationals in the
UK and UK nationals in member states. We consider this
a priority. We believe it is something on which we will
have very constructive early discussions with our
European partners. We have also said in relation to
NATO—the Prime Minister discussed this over lunch—that
we want to encourage other European leaders to deliver
on their commitment to spend 2% of their GDP on
defence. We believe that a number of European countries
are actively considering that and will be looking to do
it in due course.
-
(Con)
My Lords, is it correct, as reported in the newspapers,
that the Spanish leader has indicated that he would be
very happy for British residents in Spain to enjoy the
same rights as they do at present? If that is the case,
is it not wrong to criticise the Prime Minister for
arguing that we should get on with moving Article 50 so
that there is an opportunity for those negotiations to
continue? Could not the criticism that the Prime
Minister should take a moral lead apply equally to the
Spanish Prime Minister or to any of the other European
leaders? The problem here is Europe refusing to
guarantee the position of British citizens in Europe.
My right honourable friend the Prime Minister is surely
right to think about them as well as EU citizens living
here.
-
Certainly, the fact that the Prime Minister and the
Prime Minister of Spain had constructive discussions is
very positive. As I said, it shows that there is good
will on all sides to try to resolve this matter as
quickly as possible.
-
(Lab)
My Lords, is it not striking how often government
Ministers say how very, terribly, extremely influential
the Prime Minister is? I do not recall that ever being
said about , or, for that
matter, Margaret Thatcher. They always were very
influential.
-
I am telling you she is influential because you are
asking me.
-
(LD)
My Lords, is not the point of a negotiation or a
package of negotiations of the sort we will see with
withdrawal that we will start the negotiations but
nothing will be agreed until everything is agreed? Is
not the danger of looking at reciprocal agreements on
the rights of EU and UK citizens that nothing will be
decided until the day we leave the European Union,
which will be far too late to give certainty to EU
nationals currently resident in the United
Kingdom—something that we could do unilaterally?
-
I can only repeat what I have said in answer to all the
questions on this, which is that we are looking for an
early agreement.
-
(CB)
My Lords, I welcome the Statement repeated to the House
this afternoon, especially the assurance given by the
Prime Minister that President Trump will be 100% behind
NATO. As almost one-quarter of the European Union
countries refuse to join NATO, when can we have a 100%
guarantee that the nations of the European Union will
also support NATO?
-
We are very clear that NATO is the cornerstone of the
UK’s defence and security, and our commitment remains
as strong as ever. As I said, during the lunch the
Prime Minister discussed our commitment and that of our
European partners to NATO. I think that there was
general agreement on the importance of the organisation
going forward.
-
(Lab)
My Lords, last week in public session, evidence was
given to one of this House’s sub-committees of the
European Union Select Committee to the effect that,
going forward, agricultural industries will require
between 90,000 and 100,000 workers annually on a
temporary, not a permanent, basis—people who come for
seasonal work and then return to their countries.
Therefore, it is not just the matter of the people in
our universities, schools and hospitals or the City of
London that needs to be resolved; this particular
question, affecting, as it will, the whole future of
much of the agricultural and horticultural industries
in this country, also needs an urgent resolution.
-
The noble Lord is right that we need to address the
issues and needs of all sectors. That is why the work
of the House’s EU committees is so important. I look
forward to reading the report and am sure that
excellent suggestions will be put forward about the
kinds of issues that we need to think about during our
negotiations.
-
(Con)
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for repeating the
Statement. Does she find it strange that many Members
of this House and another place are threatening to vote
against the imposition of Article 50 after voting in
favour of holding the referendum in the first place?
Does she recall any of them saying during the
referendum campaign that, however people voted, they
would ignore the result of the referendum, whatever it
was?
-
My noble friend is right. The Article 50 Bill is indeed
a straightforward Bill: it is not about whether the UK
should leave the European Union—that decision has been
made—but about triggering Article 50.
-
(CB)
My Lords, I have never understood why Gibraltarians
would not wish to have feet in both camps, although
that is clearly a matter for them. The Prime Minister
was absolutely right to draw attention to the economic
well-being of LEDCs—less economically developed
countries. Have the Government decided which competent
UK authority will be responsible for preferential
access negotiations post Brexit?
-
I am afraid that I do not know the answer to that
question and will have to write to the noble Viscount.
-
(Lab)
My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for repeating the
Statement. Does she agree with me about the importance
of EU agencies such as FRONTEX, which protects our
external borders along with those of other member
states, the European Fundamental Rights Agency and the
European Medicines Agency? Does she believe in the
effectiveness of these organisations and their benefit
to the United Kingdom? If so, why are we putting that
at risk by going for a hard Brexit?
-
The noble Lord is absolutely right. As we discussed in
Questions today, many European bodies play an extremely
important role and are highly valued in terms of the
standards, co-operation and everything else that we get
out of them. All of these will be up for negotiation,
and we will obviously want to maintain very close
relationships with those organisations that add huge
value. However, this will also give us an opportunity
to look at how we can perhaps improve standards and
quality in this country, because we will be free to do
that.
-
(LD)
My Lords, when considering the quality of the commitment
of the President to NATO, are we entitled to look at his
continuing favourable ambiguity towards Mr Putin, whose
avowed intention is the undermining of NATO?
-
The Prime Minister has been extremely clear to both
President Putin and, indeed, the President of the United
States that our relationship with Russia cannot be
business as usual, as a result of its actions in Ukraine
and Syria. Where there are issues that we disagree on, we
should hold Russia to account, but we also need to have
hard-headed engagement where we can move forward. As the
Prime Minister was very clear and said to the President,
we need to engage but beware.
-
(Con)
My Lords, can I clear up a small point? I notice in the
printed version of the Statement—or the Statement from
the other place—that in “Global Britain” the “Global” is
in upper case. Is this a renaming of Great Britain, a
typo or more of a marketing slogan like “Cool Britannia”?
On a more substantial point, I am glad that the EU
recognises that Libya is the place in which refugees and
migrants should be concentrated so they can be properly
assessed and helped as necessary. The crucial thing in my
plan, which I produced in 2015 and have subsequently
mentioned, is that there should be a military presence of
NATO to protect these people and make sure that they are
not ill-treated in Libya. I hope that the military
presence would be United Nations sanctioned, with NATO in
blue helmets, through a Security Council resolution
because, without that, the ideas that the EU is floating
about Libya could end in disaster.
-
I assure my noble friend that the UK is working with the
international community to support the Government of
National Accord’s efforts to deliver security and
stability for the Libyan people and to tackle the flow of
illegal migrants through Libya. We have allocated more
than £10.5 million this year for assistance to Libya and
technical support to its Government.
-
(Lab)
My Lords, I am glad that the Statement and the noble
Baroness herself stressed the need for a positive
partnership with the European Union. Is the noble
Baroness not concerned then that the President of the
United States is not well disposed towards the European
Union? Indeed, he wants it to fall apart—likewise his
nominee for ambassador to the European Union. Does that
not give the noble Baroness cause for concern?
-
One of the things discussed over the lunch was exactly
how we can ensure that relationships between the United
States and the European Union remain as strong as ever.
We are very keen to make sure that that is well
understood and that the EU along with us play an
important international role as we always have done.
-
(Ind
Lab)
My Lords, on the sapphire jubilee of the Queen, can I say
how pleased I am that we are in the process having a
realm for her and her successors to rule over? My second
point is in relation to the sort of hate campaign going
on against the United States simply and solely because it
has, for four years, elected a different sort of
President—if I can put it that way. Did the Prime
Minister remind Europe that it is protected against
people who wish it ill by the enormous economic and
military power of the United States through NATO?
-
As I said in the Statement, the Prime Minister discussed
with our European partners the need to engage patiently
and constructively with America as a friend and ally—an
ally that has helped guarantee the longest period of
peace Europe has known. Certainly we are and remain close
partners on trade and security of defence. Also, as
friends, where we have differences we need to be honest
about them.
-
(UKIP)
Can I follow up the question from the noble Baroness,
Lady Royall, and repeat a question that I have put to the
Government many times since 1999? Does it matter if the
European Union falls apart and the democratic nations of
Europe go back to their own currencies, freely trading
together and supporting NATO together and so on? What is
the point of the European Union now? Why do we need it at
all? Should we not be very grateful if it falls apart?
-
We are clear that we want to see a strong Europe and we
want to have a strong partnership and relationship with
Europe, but we will do it as a global and independent
Britain.
-
(Lab)
Contrary to the implications of the last question, is it
not the case that the most likely immediate result of the
geopolitical circumstances of the time, with the attitude
of President Trump and the Brexit proposition, is that
France and Germany will have much closer defence
co-operation? The very thing that Britain has always been
wary about will probably result in terms of very close
defence co-operation within the European Union.
-
As I have said repeatedly during this discussion, we want
a strong Europe. We want a strong relationship and a new
partnership with Europe. How Europe takes itself forward
once we have left is for Europe to determine, but while
we are still involved, we will play our strong part. I am
much more optimistic, by the sound of it, than most noble
Lords in this House that we will achieve a good deal for
both us and our European partners.
|