Vol. 798 Wednesday No. 325 3 July 2019

PARLIAMENTARYDEBATES (HANSARD) HOUSE OF LORDS OFFICIAL REPORT

ORDEROFBUSINESS

Questions Asthma ...... 1435 National Health Service: Bullying ...... 1437 Affordable Housing ...... 1440 Sexual Offences: Anonymity...... 1442 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee Motion to Agree...... 1444 SS “Richard Montgomery” Question for Short Debate...... 1499

Grand Committee Wild Animals in Circuses (No. 2) Bill Committee...... GC 93 Lords wishing to be supplied with these Daily Reports should give notice to this effect to the Printed Paper Office. No proofs of Daily Reports are provided. Corrections for the bound volume which Lords wish to suggest to the report of their speeches should be clearly indicated in a copy of the Daily Report, which, with the column numbers concerned shown on the front cover, should be sent to the Editor of Debates, House of Lords, within 14 days of the date of the Daily Report. This issue of the Official Report is also available on the Internet at https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2019-07-03

The first time a Member speaks to a new piece of parliamentary business, the following abbreviations are used to show their party affiliation: Abbreviation Party/Group CB Cross Bench Con Conservative DUP Democratic Unionist Party GP Green Party Ind Lab Independent Labour Ind LD Independent Liberal Democrat Ind SD Independent Social Democrat Ind UU Independent Ulster Unionist Lab Labour Lab Co-op Labour and Co-operative Party LD Liberal Democrat LD Ind Liberal Democrat Independent Non-afl Non-affiliated PC Plaid Cymru UKIP UK Independence Party UUP Ulster Unionist Party

No party affiliation is given for Members serving the House in a formal capacity, the Lords spiritual, Members on leave of absence or Members who are otherwise disqualified from sitting in the House. © Parliamentary Copyright House of Lords 2019, this publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. 1435 Asthma [3 JULY 2019] Asthma 1436

House of Lords optimise medical management of the condition. Some clinicians and staff are unaware of national treatment Wednesday 3 July 2019 guidelines, prescribing advice or recommendations from the national review of asthma deaths. What is the 3 pm Government’s response to this? Why has only one of the NRAD recommendations been implemented since Prayers—read by the Lord Bishop of Carlisle. 2014? Why are the remaining 18 still to be acted on to try to stop these unnecessary and untimely deaths? Asthma Baroness Blackwood of North Oxford: The noble Question Baroness will have heard in my opening remarks that we have put treating asthma and respiratory diseases 3.07 pm as a key priority within the NHS Long Term Plan Asked by The Earl of Clancarty precisely because we recognise that we need to improve our performance on respiratory diseases. Working with To ask Her Majesty’s Government what support Asthma UK, we have identified that one of the key they are giving to people suffering from asthma, challenges in improving performance has been the including on access to medicines. identification of those with severe asthma and providing TheParliamentaryUnder-Secretaryof State,Department them with an appropriate care plan. That is exactly of Health and Social Care (Baroness Blackwood of why we are pleased that a new NICE quality standard, North Oxford) (Con): My Lords, respiratory disease, QOF and the RightCare programme are in place; including asthma, is a clinical priority in the NHS these should help to improve referrals and outcomes Long Term Plan, which aims to improve outcomes for for patients as is desperately needed. patients through earlier diagnosis and increased access to treatments. Pharmacists in primary care networks Baroness Manzoor (Con): My Lords, as the will undertake medicine reviews for asthma patients. Government roll out the early diagnosis centres, including This will include education on inhaler use and uptake for lung-health checks, across the country, will they be of dry powder and smart inhalers where clinically looking to implement recommendation 1e of the lung appropriate.Finally,the NHS will build on the RightCare task force as part of their strategy, so that air pollution programmetoimplementrespiratoryinitiativesin2019-20. is monitored and the NHS can provide advice when The Earl of Clancarty (CB): My Lords, Asthma pollution levels are high? UK finds that, of the 2.3 million people with asthma in England who pay for their prescriptions, more than Baroness Blackwood of North Oxford: I thank my three-quarters struggle to afford them, let alone follow noble friend. She is right that we need to improve our an essential treatment plan. Does the Minister agree response to those at high risk of respiratory illness. that prescription charging sends out entirely the wrong That is partly why we are improving our offer on signals to the whole community about the seriousness mobile lung-health screening, specifically as part of of the condition which causes the deaths of many the national targeted lung health checks programme. young people? The great tragedy is that most of those It is also why we are offering smoking cessation advice deaths are avoidable. Should we not as a priority look and treatment as part of that service. We offer the again at the exemptions list? general population and vulnerable groups advice via the daily air quality index, but she is right: we need to Baroness Blackwood of North Oxford: I thank the improve our monitoring of air pollution if we are to noble Lord for his question. I have met with Asthma make progress on this issue. It is something that I will UK on this issue. As an asthmatic myself, I understand take up with the department. the challenges of keeping up with medication, especially when in the middle of an exacerbation. At the moment, we do not intend to review the prescription charges Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe (Lab): In view of the list. However, there are some exemptions in the gravely damaging effect of asthma on children, does prescription list, and we have committed to work with the Minister agree that the abolition by the former Asthma UK to ensure that those who are eligible for Mayor of London of the west London zone for congestion low-income exemptions and for the pre-payment charge charging has increased the amount of air pollution in are accessing them and to look at any other ways in London over recent years? Many children have died which we can help those who need life-saving medication. and many people have suffered as a consequence. Will she ask the candidates for the Tory leadership whether Baroness Wheeler (Lab): My Lords, I am sure that they are prepared to reintroduce such a zone in London? the Minister will know about the recent shocking report from the BMA describing the UK health system as complacent about the risks of asthma. It comments Baroness Blackwood of North Oxford: The noble on and documents some of the tragic deaths of young Lord is asking me to step in and comment on matters children who would still be alive if their chronic asthma that are slightly outside my brief. However, I am had been properly cared for. It shows a sorry litany of pleased that we have brought in the clean air strategy, absence of a proper asthma plan across primary and which is a significant step forward. He is also asking secondary care and failure to refer children suffering me to commit the Mayor of London rather than repeated attacks to a specialist respiratory team or to leadership candidates to a policy area. We do need to 1437 Asthma [LORDS] National Health Service: Bullying 1438

[BARONESS BLACKWOOD OF NORTH OXFORD] throughthenationalSocialPartnershipForum’scollective move further and faster on air pollution; that is what I call to action; the interim people plan, which, through expect to see in the prevention Green Paper which will its new offer for our people, will create a healthy, be published shortly. inclusive and compassionate culture where bullying, harassment and abuse will not be tolerated; and our The Lord Bishop of Carlisle: My Lords, given the alliance of healthcare organisations, which is promoting recent report of an upsurge in acute asthma attacks civility and respect throughout the NHS. among schoolchildren at the start of each school year, and given that—as we have already heard—there are Lord Clark of Windermere (Lab): I thank the Minister three deaths per day from asthma in the UK, many of for her Answer. As she said, the latest survey shows them preventable, what plans do Her Majesty’s that over 25% of NHS staff had personally experienced Government have for encouraging better health education bullying from fellow employees in the previous 12 months. regarding the seriousness of this disease? Does she agree that that is appalling and intolerable, and that in most other organisations it would simply Baroness Blackwood of North Oxford: As ever, the not be tolerated? I accept that the problem is exacerbated right reverend Prelate is insightful on this matter. by the chronic staff shortages, but bullying can be Children going into school with identified respiratory reduced by firm and proper management practices. illnesses should have care plans to assist the school in That is within the Government’s power, so will they caring for them. Asthma UK has indicated that many get on with the action of reducing the intolerable level children are slipping through the net and remaining of bullying in the NHS? on long-term oral steroids in primary care. This results in repeated trips to A&E with no referral to specialist Baroness Blackwood of North Oxford: I thank the centres. We are working with NHS Improvement and noble Lord for his question, which is a follow-up to a others to ensure that we support them with training in recent Question on this. This is exactly why the the use of medication and improving the use of smart Government have brought out a manifesto commitment inhalers, which can track the management of their to tackle violence and abuse against staff, including care and reduce referrals to secondary care. legislation that has already brought forward one conviction. NHS Improvement and NHS England Lord Rennard (LD): My Lords, I am grateful to the have reviewed what central support arrangements should NHS for the fact that as a diabetic I do not pay be provided to support NHS organisations in their prescription charges, but other people in England with responsibility to protect staff from unacceptable violence long-term conditions have to pay such charges. In and abuse. In addition, we are bringing forward a plan Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales, all prescription that will pilot and evaluate the use of body-worn charges have now been scrapped. Is this not somewhat cameras by paramedics, who experience the worst of anomalous? Is it not unfair that the 2.3 million adults the violence and abuse, so that we can ensure that they with asthma have to pay these charges? have evidence for prosecutions that is sadly often lacking for convictions where they are appropriate. Baroness Blackwood of North Oxford: The noble Lord will already have heard me answer his question Baroness Jolly (LD): My Lords, as we have heard, in reply to the opening Question. I have already met levels of abuse and bullying are unacceptably high in Asthma UK on this issue and discussed its concerns the NHS, and whistleblowing is not a universally about the balance of prescription charges. We are not trusted or successful route to resolution. The Scottish in a position at the moment to review prescription Parliament is investigating using the Scottish Public charges as a whole, but I will be working with that Services Ombudsman to investigate unresolved NHS organisation to make sure that the system works as whistleblowing cases. Does the Minister consider the effectively as possible for asthma patients and that use of the English Parliamentary and Health Service they get access to the exemptions that are in place. Ombudsman a sensible route for English NHS whistleblowers? If not, what would she recommend for frustrated NHS whistleblowers? National Health Service: Bullying Question Baroness Blackwood of North Oxford: I thank the noble Baroness for that proposal; I shall certainly look 3.15 pm into it. A number of measures have been put in place Asked by Lord Clark of Windermere to enable a safe space for whistleblowers to come forward, including a number of regulations ensuring Toask Her Majesty’sGovernment what assessment that they are protected and that non-disclosure agreements they have made of the level of bullying, harassment do not inhibit them from coming forward, but I will and abuse in the National Health Service in England. certainly consider her proposal.

TheParliamentaryUnder-Secretaryof State,Department Lord Dobbs (Con): My Lords, does my noble of Health and Social Care (Baroness Blackwood of friend accept that the rights that we all enjoy with the North Oxford) (Con): My Lords, the NHS staff survey National Health Service also come with commensurate shows that the level of bullying, harassment and abuse responsibilities: the responsibilities of patients not to in the NHS is too high, so we are tackling these issues abuse staff and to turn up to their appointments, and 1439 National Health Service: Bullying [3 JULY 2019] Affordable Housing 1440 the responsibilities of staff to ensure that the National that. That is why the NHS is implementing the workforce Health Service is being used honestly and responsibly? race equality standard, which is a requirement for Does she agree that the BMA’s recent announcement NHS commissioners and healthcare providers—including that charging health tourists is “fundamentally racist” independent organisations with an NHS contract is not only bonkers but financially disgraceful, and —to track and ensure that employees from BAME deeply damaging to the people and the patients the backgrounds have equal access to career opportunities National Health Service was set up to protect? and receive fair treatment in the workplace, and to ensure that this is properly recorded and published. Baroness Blackwood of North Oxford: I certainly This will drive through the improvements she seeks. agree that charging those who come from other countries and use the National Health Service is perfectly sensible and appropriate, and by no means racist. I also believe Affordable Housing that, as the call for action on bullying says, it should be Question perfectly straightforward to get out messages on safety from senior leaders and staff voices. It should be a 3.23 pm positive message about how it is a natural extension of Asked by Lord Kennedy of Southwark the social contract between the NHS and those who use it. To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to remove any impediments to selling Baroness Masham of Ilton (CB): My Lords, if a public land to local authorities or housing associations member of staff is being bullied by their senior, who at below its market value in order to increase the should they go to for help? number of affordable houses.

Baroness Blackwood of North Oxford: The noble Lord Kennedy of Southwark (Lab Co-op): My Lords, Baroness asks an important question. There are structures I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name built into the NHS to enable those people to speak up. on the Order Paper, and in doing so refer the House to There is a “freedom to speak up” champion and a my relevant registered interest. system of champions, so that it is perfectly clear to those experiencing bullying by senior managers who Lord Young of Cookham (Con): My Lords, it is they can speak to. government policy to increase the number of homes being built, including affordable homes. As far as Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Lab): Does what the possible, any impediments to selling government land Minister suggests apply to the actions of Ministers? and accelerating new house-building have been—and She will recall, from when he was Secretary of State, are being—removed. Guidance issued by the Treasury Mr Jeremy Hunt’s practice of insisting on a weekly indicates that decisions should take account of wider Mondaymorning meeting with the key national regulators, social costs and benefits in the public interest, and it at which the sacking of chief executive officers was may be appropriate to choose an option that does not often discussed. Bullying starts at the top. If Ministers generate the highest Exchequer receipt. take a bullying attitude towards the NHS, they can hardly be surprised if that behaviour is followed at Lord Kennedy of Southwark: I thank the noble local level. Lord for that response. Making publicly held land available for the provision of social housing, encouraging Baroness Blackwood of North Oxford: I am afraid I below-value sales, would go a long way towards delivering do not recognise the characterisation set out by the on the Government’s pledges to fix our broken housing noble Lord. One of the key characteristics set out by market, and have many other benefits. Can he tell us the former Secretary of State in his leadership was the likelihood of that happening? that the NHS should be open and not have a culture of blame, and that people should feel free to speak up, so that when mistakes are made they should be corrected. Lord Young of Cookham: I agree. Until quite recently the policy on the disposal of government surplus land was that the best price should be secured—in the Baroness Hussein-Ece (LD): My Lords, the NHS is interests of the taxpayer, who is the ultimate owner. the biggest employer of people from black and minority That money went into a central coffer and was then ethnic backgrounds. They face bullying and harassment disposed of according to the Government’s priorities. from within—from co-workers—but also from members There was a presumption against short-circuiting that of the public and patients.There is considerable anecdotal process and disposing of land at less than best value. evidence that some patients refuse to be treated by a Two years ago that policy was amended, following a clinician or a nurse from a minority ethnic background. meeting of the housing implementation task force What is being done to protect these workers and and, as I said in my reply, it is now possible to take the ensure that the NHS has a much more inclusive wider social costs and benefits and the public interest environment and culture? into account and to make the housing land available directly. A recent example of that was a site that was Baroness Blackwood of North Oxford: The noble made available to the Government, initially to the homes Baroness is quite right. Bullying faced by those in the agency—the Housing Corporation as was—and then BAME community is more significant, and data supports passed on to Wolverhampton Council for £1. Now, 1441 Affordable Housing [LORDS] Sexual Offences: Anonymity 1442

[LORD YOUNG OF COOKHAM] Lord Hamilton of Epsom (Con): My Lords, I refer 450 homes are being built on that land. That is a good to my interests in the register. The Ministry of Defence example of what the noble Lord has asked for, and I is one of the main landowners in this country, and hope that we see much more of it. some of its land gets sold off for development. If it is sold below market price, the Ministry of Defence is Lord Naseby (Con): Is it not extraordinary that the effectively subsidising low-cost housing across the country. Labour Party should remind us of the poor position Is it right for that to happen? of social housing? After all, the Blair Government had a very low quantum of building, the Brown Government Lord Young of Cookham: The Ministry of Defence followed suit and, I am sorry to say, the Cameron had a target of disposing of land in 2015 that would Government acted similarly. Against that background, provide 55,000 homes. In my initial reply, I said that is the example that my noble friend gave today not the Government could take into account the wider encouraging: that for a particular need the local authority social costs and benefits and the public interest. That is getting land at below cost price? Should that be the is a good reason for not going through the whole policy—for social housing only, where there is currently process of putting the land on the open market and demand in some of our great cities? trying to get the best price but instead trying to do a quick deal that provides affordable homes, which may Lord Young of Cookham: I agree with the thrust of be more broadly in the public interest than the process my noble friend’s question. The other thing that we initially followed. have done is that when surplus land becomes available from any government department it is put on a website, The Earl of Listowel (CB): This policy is particularly and the homes agency has the opportunity to acquire welcome when we think about “just managing”families it before anybody else. It can put in a bid and do what and especially their children. As Baroness Farrington he and the noble Lord suggested: to make the land of Ribbleton reminded us, when children continually available for housing. Weare seeing more such transactions have to move home, their education is often disrupted. where the land is made available to local authorities or Is this policy not therefore particularly welcome for housing associations, and the Government are committed young people in such families? to providing 160,000 homes, I think, by March next year on land that was in government ownership in 2015. Lord Young of Cookham: I agree that we should do all we can to increase the number of social homes that Lord Shipley (LD): My Lords, I refer the House to are rented. A £9 billion affordable homes programme my interests in the register. A few days ago, at the is targeted on areas where affordability is a real issue. Housing 2019 conference, the Prime Minister said Within that, there is an opportunity for homes for that, social rent, which I know is of particular interest to … “we are delivering a whole new approach to social housing the noble Earl. Because this is a Government with a bold vision for housing and a willingness to act on it”. Can the Minister can tell the House what that bold Sexual Offences: Anonymity vision is for social housing? Question

Lord Young of Cookham: Yes, indeed. We announced 3.30 pm that we would abolish the cap on the housing revenue account,toenablelocalauthoritiestobuildupto£4billion- Asked by Lord Lexden worth of new homes and introduce a new generation of council housing. Toask Her Majesty’sGovernment what assessment they have made of the petition calling for anonymity for those accused of sexual offences until charged. Lord Dykes (CB): Since the Minister has conceded the need for government intervention against excessive free market distortion effects, particularly from overseas The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Williams buyers, will the Government now take more action to of Trafford) (Con): My Lords, the Government believe ensure that empty properties are dealt with energetically that there should in general be a right to anonymity and not left unoccupied, as are so many owned by before the point of charge in respect of all offences, overseas buyers, who pay just over £1,000 or £2,000 on but there will be exceptional circumstances where there council tax? are legitimate policing reasons for naming a suspect.

Lord Young of Cookham: Again, it is sad that any Lord Lexden (Con): My Lords, does not this petition property is left empty for a substantial length of time, bring home to us all the misery and distress endured given the number of people in housing need. As the not just by well-known figures but by scores of innocent noble Lord will know, a premium rate of council tax is men and women up and down our country, whose paid on properties left empty for more than a certain lives have been ruined because police officers decided time. In certain parts of the country, additional council that allegations of child sex abuse should always be tax is levied on owners of second homes. I will, however, believed and divulged their names before charges were reflect on his question to see whether there is any laid? In one notorious case, the police went further. further action we can take to make sure that houses Who can forget the truly shocking spectacle of a are occupied by people who need them. senior police officer standing outside Sir Edward Heath’s 1443 Sexual Offences: Anonymity[3 JULY 2019] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1444 house in Salisbury and appealing for evidence through Baroness Williams of Trafford: It might assist my which his reputation could be destroyed? It is an noble friend if I say that the College of Policing’s injustice which continues to cry out for the independent authorised professional practice guidance on relationships inquiry which the Government have shamefully denied with the media highlights the importance of respecting him, in defiance of the wishes of this House. Surely a suspect’s right to privacy. It states: action should now be considered in response to the “Police will not name those arrested, or suspected of a crime, petition to strengthen protection for that precious save in exceptional circumstances where there is a legitimate fundamental right: the presumption of innocence. policing purpose to do so”. The naming of an arrested person before they are charged must be, Baroness Williams of Trafford: My noble friend will know that once a petition reaches 10,000 signatures, “authorised by a chief officer”, the Government can consider it for debate—I know I who must ensure that the Crown Prosecution Service do not need to tell him that. He will also know that the is consulted. release of suspects’ names by the police is governed by the College of Policing’s guidance on relationships Lord Campbell-Savours (Lab): My Lords, how can with the media. Although I absolutely recognise the the Government ignore this petition, which has been points made by my noble friend about some high-profile signed not by 10,000 people in the last 24 hours, as the cases, we are not aware of any recent evidence to Minister said, but by nearly 20,000 people? In the suggest that the police are not adhering to the guidance. Janner case the police, before charge, placed an advert in the local media, with a phone number, calling on Lord Morgan (Lab): My Lords, does not the noble so-called Janner accusers to come forward. They did, Lord raise a very important point about the frail basis with the result that there was a flood of compensation that the police rely in arriving at the facts in these claims under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme matters and how it is desperately necessary to have an from people, most of whom had criminal records, independent view? In the case of Sir Edward Heath, all of which have now been withdrawn. There is the police said that the evidence was compelling and something wrong with the arrangements as they currently true; we now know that it was essentially made up. Is it exist and this petition, signed by all these people, is not deplorable that in cases such as these the police are very important. It should be taken seriously by the acting not as the custodians of civil liberties and the Government. rule of law but as a major threat to them? Baroness Williams of Trafford: My Lords, I am not suggesting at all that the petition is not being taken Baroness Williams of Trafford: My Lords, first, I seriously. The independent inquiry into historical child should apologise: I said that 10,000 signatures were sexual abuse is taking a very robust approach to the needed; I meant 100,000 signatures. On the noble institutional responses to those historical allegations Lord’s point about independence and the presumed of child sexual abuse. culpability of those who have been accused, the report stipulated that no inference of guilt was to be drawn but that the individual would have been interviewed Lord Marlesford (Con): My Lords, are there any under caution. circumstances in which this Government will commission a judicial review into the handling of the case against Sir Edward Heath? Lord Paddick (LD): My Lords, does the Minister agree that being accused of many offences, including those of dishonesty, can have a devastating impact on Baroness Williams of Trafford: I think I have made someone’s reputation? Will she meet me to discuss it clear to the House that my right honourable friend whether the Government will support my Private the Home Secretary does not intend to institute such a Member’s Bill that would provide anonymity after review. arrest, which gives allegations credibility, until someone is charged for all offences unless a judge orders otherwise? Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee Motion to Agree Baroness Williams of Trafford: I would be very happy to meet the noble Lord—in fact, we met before 3.38 pm his Bill had its Second Reading. Moved by Baroness Smith of Basildon Viscount Hailsham (Con): My Lords, may I say to That, further to the resolutions of this House on my noble friend, in support of what has just been said 14 and 28 January,and that of the House of Commons by the noble Lord, Lord Paddick, that the best way on 14 March, it is expedient that a joint committee forward is to have a presumption in favour of anonymity of Lords and Commons be appointed to consider but to provide the courts with a right to disapply the and report on the costs and implications for the presumption in the event that the court is satisfied that United Kingdom of exiting the European Union there is good reason, on application by either party; without a withdrawal agreement on 31 October 2019, for example, to obtain evidence that might assist the and that the committee should report its findings prosecution or the defence? by 30 September 2019. 1445 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[LORDS] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1446

Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab): My Lords, I have who until last week was responsible for no-deal border tabled this Motion, following discussions across the planning covering the Port of Dover and Northern House, because while leaving the EU without a deal Ireland. We also know that Oliver Robbins will cease was previously viewed as a mere bargaining chip, now his role; demonised by some, he remains the only it looms as a real possibility. Your Lordships’ House person who has managed to negotiate a deal that has been clear that it opposes a no-deal Brexit as respects both the Government’s and the EU’s red lines. damaging to the interests of the UK, and MPs have Despite the EU asserting that it will not reopen expressed similar views. discussions on the withdrawal agreement, the two At what could be his last appearance at the Dispatch leadership candidates are busy appointing negotiating Box as Chancellor, Philip Hammond restated that teams. Mr Johnson is relying on that man of moderation, leaving without a deal would be, Jacob Rees-Mogg, and Brexit Secretary Steve Barclay, “bad for the British economy”.—[Official Report, Commons, who in presenting the Government’scase on the extension 2/7/19; col. 1056.] to Article 50 said: … Yet Ivan Rogers,who served with distinction as Permanent “I commend the motion to the House”.—[Official Report, Commons, 14/3/19; col. 628.] Representative to the EU, has predicted that, with patience running out and a new Prime Minister likely He then voted against it—just the man to lead sensitive to move the goalposts, no deal is now the most likely negotiations requiring trust. Jeremy Hunt, meanwhile, outcome. We cannot know for certain what either has engaged former Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Conservative leadership candidate will do come 11 pm Harper. Perhaps he will bring some much-needed reality on 31 October with no ratified deal. However, neither to trade negotiations, given the Canadian experience. seems alarmed at the prospect. This is perhaps Or perhaps not, given last night’s report that Canada unsurprising, given that their current pitch is not to is refusing to roll over CETA in the event of no deal. the nation but to the mere 0.3% of UK adults who are The National Audit Office reports that the new members of their party. customs IT systems are not ready. Meanwhile, crucial Boris Johnson, never one to fuss about detail, does legislation on immigration and trade is not on the not realise that without a deal there will be no statute book, and it is hard to see either Bill being implementation period. No withdrawal agreement means enacted by October. While hundreds of no-deal SIs just that—no agreement. Just out. End of. But as both may have superficially transferred the functions of EU contenders now consider no deal a serious option, we agencies to UK public bodies, are we truly confident need to be 100% honest about the implications for our that they have the capacity to deliver from day one? economy, policing and national security, food and For example, the Health and Safety Executive would medicine supplies, transport, travel and every area of immediately take over chemicals regulation, despite our lives where we currently interact with the EU. never having had this responsibility before. I am grateful for the work of colleagues across your Many other examples exist. We should also be Lordships’ House on various EU committees, plus the concerned about food and product safety if UK bodies expertise offered by hundreds of witnesses, that has lose access to EU-wide alert systems and databases resulted in many detailed reports assessing the implications with nothing in place to take on that responsibility. As of exiting with or without any agreement. Those reports the Road Haulage Association declared today,businesses will be invaluable to the proposed Joint Committee. still do not know what is expected of them, with the With the deadline at the end of October and a new potential for massive backlogs at ports costing billions. Prime Minister later this month, it is time to update A Joint Committee should be prepared to assess whether and reassess the risks and implications. the necessary legislation, structures and organisations are in place and operational. This Motion, like others we have considered, is designed to be helpful to this House and the other A committee should also consider the economic place, ensuring that, when debating contentious issues, implications. The Society of Motor Manufacturers we deal with fact and not just opinion. Even those and Traders estimates that without a deal customs who opposed our special Select Committee on the delays could cost up to £50,000 a minute.Some £4.5 billion then Trade Union Bill later confirmed its value. We of WTO tariffs would undermine our auto industry’s also agreed a similar procedural Motion on the English competitiveness just when British manufacturing is votes for English laws legislation in 2015. At that time fighting for its survival. Tesco, Britain’s largest retailer, the Government refused to engage, but the stakes are has warned that no deal in October would be more so much higher now. Honest, forensic assessment is problematic than it would have been in March, given essential. the pressures of Christmas. Other food manufacturers and retailers remain apprehensive about their ability I know that there are some, even in your Lordships’ to import and preserve fresh fruit, vegetables and House, for whom crashing out holds no fear. If convinced other perishable goods. The Bank of England estimated of the benefits of a no-deal exit, they should also an immediate hit to the economy roughly equivalent welcome such an inquiry. to the 2008 financial crisis and a crash in the pound, One task of the Joint Committee will be to assess disrupting trade and closing businesses. our readiness for and the implications of an abrupt In an unprecedented joint letter to the Prime Minister, exit. Last week we heard of the imminent departure of the heads of the TUC and the CBI warned of the Tom Shinner, the top civil servant of the Department dangers to the economy, stating that the shock would for Exiting the European Union who was overseeing be felt for generations to come. The danger is real, yet no-deal planning. He follows HMRC’s Karen Wheeler, Mr Hunt has said that, in the event of no deal, he 1447 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[3 JULY 2019] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1448 would tell the owners of a bankrupt business that their 3.49 pm sacrifice had been worth it. How? To quote him, because we would be living in, Lord Newby (LD): My Lords, I thank the noble “a country where politicians do what the people tell them to do”. Baroness, Lady Smith, for tabling the Motion. When the idea of a Joint Committee was first suggested, That is not leadership. Politicians should tell the truth I was very sceptical about it, for two reasons. First, I and one way of getting to the truth on this matter thought: surely it is obvious that the costs of leaving would be via a committee that examines, interrogates without a deal are so horrendous that there is no need and presents the evidence. to spell them out again. But that was before it became I hope the Minister has listened to those who crystal clear that both candidates for leadership of the represent the UK’s interests across the world, including Tory party were prepared to contemplate no deal as a diplomats who believe that the handling of Brexit has serious option and seemed either ignorant of or significantly damaged our global standing. I hope he unconcerned about its consequences. So there is definitely will acknowledge that, in the event of crashing out, we a need for the exercise to be done. will immediately cease participation in EU defence missions, leading to a loss of influence in peacekeeping Secondly, I thought that, even if we were to propose and anti-piracy efforts. I also hope he has read the such a committee, the Commons would not pick up excellent if harrowing committee report on security our suggestion and therefore that it would be a waste and policing which outlined how the UK would lose of time. But I was mistaken. There is clearly an appetite vital security databases and schemes, many with no in the Commons for this exercise to be undertaken, precedent existing for third-country access. A diminished and we should therefore set the ball in motion today. UK does not just put our own UK citizens at risk; it Before looking at the effects of no deal on any also damages our privileged relationships with partners specific area of the economy or public policy, we such as the USA and Canada. Such drastic changes need to be clear about what it means overall for our are not compatible with the vision of an outward-looking position at the country. This was recently spelled out global Britain offered in the referendum. by Sir Ivan Rogers, the former head of UKREP. No Given the lack of clarity and predictability, surely it deal, he said, is right for Parliament to be fully informed and engaged. “is not a destination. It is simply a volatile and uncertain … state However,despite criticising Dominic Raab for suggesting of purgatory, in which you have forfeited all the leverage to the that Parliament should be prorogued to force through other side because you start with a blank slate of no preferential no deal, Boris Johnson is still toying with that idea. arrangements, and live, in the interim—probably for years—on a This would be disturbingly undemocratic and the coward’s basis that they legislate in their own interests”. way out. Whatever happened to the Vote Leave campaign Leaving without a deal means that there will be no pledge to uphold UK parliamentary sovereignty? transitional arrangements and on 1 November,17 weeks While we have all these and many more predictions from now, we will be on our own. and anecdotes, Parliament has not recently been afforded an opportunity to study and comment on them, hence Some Brexiteers have argued that nothing will change the Motion today. A Joint Committee of both Houses, and, in particular, that goods will continue to flow possibly drawn from the existing membership of our freely and that no one will notice the difference. It is own EU Committee and the Commons Exiting the therefore worth reading the Commission’s take-stock EU Committee, would examine the evidence. First, it report to last week’s Council meeting on preparations would have the power to request the type of documents made in the EU against no deal. I will quote from just that the Government have been reluctant to make one item, which states: available to Parliament and the public. Secondly, it “In the field of sanitary and phytosanitary controls, Member would have the authority to question Ministers, civil States have set up new Border Inspection Posts … or extended servants, diplomats and businesspeople. Thirdly, it existing ones at entry points of imports from the United Kingdom could provide an up-to-date picture for the incoming into the EU”. Prime Minister. Finally, it would give both Houses an I may have missed something, but I assume that the opportunity to discuss its findings in advance of the only logical point of having new inspection posts is to October deadline. conduct new inspections, which means delays—and I know, as does the Minister, that there are some in these delays would not disappear any time soon. Government who see this Motion in the spirit it is Noble Lords may have heard an interview with the intended and welcome it as a positive step forward, so head of Fujitsu on the “Today”programme last Thursday. I hope that the Minister can tell us that the Government He explained that his company was a member of the will accept our proposals and then diligently work UK Government task force looking at technological across both Houses—all parties and the Cross ways to avoid controls at borders. Asked how the work Benches—to ensure that the committee is swiftly was going, he said that there were “many difficulties”. established and able to start work. If he does not, we Asked how long before there would be anyimplementation cannot accept marching towards the cliff edge without solutions, he could not even begin to hazard a guess. an up-to-date assessment of what lurks beyond. With or without Government’ssupport, I urge your Lordships’ So, when noble Lords opposite say, as they repeatedly House to support this proposal to provide the House do, that the new border controls that will be in place of Commons with the opportunity to consider its for 1 November are unnecessary, they are, to put it at merits and to continue working to avoid the worst of its politest, peddling a myth. To suggest, as they all outcomes: a chaotic, damaging, no-deal Brexit. I sometimes do, that we can simply dispense with customs beg to move. controls altogether and let smuggling rip is not only 1449 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[LORDS] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1450

[LORD NEWBY] economic costs through lost growth greatly outweigh being criminally irresponsible but ignoring the fact our net contributions to the EU budget, and there is that even if we were to do so, the EU will not follow no evidence that trade deals with the rapidly growing suit. markets outside the EU would be better than those the Fujitsu is one of 1,000 Japanese companies that EU as a whole can negotiate—quite the opposite. I operate in the United Kingdom. Last week, Taro- challenge anybody to offer even a shred of evidence Ko-no, Japan’s Foreign Minister, explained that no deal that leaving without a deal would do anything but would, make us less safe and less secure. “have a very negative impact on their operation”— What is now a Tory virility symbol was not remotely by which he means cuts in investment and employment. being offered in 2016 and has but minority support in A Joint Select Committee would be able to confirm the country now. In 2016 the Vote Leave campaign that that is what we would face. It would also confirm ruled out a no-deal Brexit and spoke repeatedly of the overall impact of no deal on the economy and the negotiating a deal before even starting the legal process public finances. According to the Government’s own to leave. Today, in the latest YouGov poll, only 28% of estimates, published in their 26 February document the population—less than the Brexit Party vote in the Implications for Business and Trade of a No Deal Exit, European Parliament elections—supports leaving with a transition to WTO rules would lead to an economy no deal. Among 18 to 24 year-olds this figure falls to that would be between 6% and 9% smaller over a just 8%. So a policy option being clutched by Johnson 15-year period, but the decrease would be 8% in and Hunt as their crucifix against the vampire of the Scotland and Wales, 9% in Northern Ireland and 10% Brexit Party is not even going to protect the Tory in the north-east. The Chancellor said yesterday that party from the electoral and existential threats it now the cost to the Exchequer would be some £90 billion in faces. hard cash per year. Nevertheless, Boris Johnson said last week that we Of course, these costs are only part of the story. would be leaving the EU on 31 October, “do or die”. Freedom of movement would end on 1 November, Jeremy Hunt on Sunday, not to be outdone, said that and British citizens planning to work in the EU would there was not much difference between him and Boris find that they had no right to do so. Equally, we would on the issue. There is of course, in reality, zero chance find many sources of vital workers blocked under the of reaching a new agreement with the EU before the Government’s planned immigration policy. The end of October, and therefore leaving without one Government are very fond of saying that they still remains a growing possibility. want the brightest and best to be able to work here. But as far as they are concerned, this does not apply to As this would be an act of monumental irresponsibility the brightest and best care assistants, agricultural workers, and stupidity, Parliament should at least prepare for baristas or lab technicians, all of whom we need from such a decision with its eyes open. The Joint Committee the EU on a continuing basis and all of whom would that this Motion envisages would ensure that we did be barred under the Government’s immigration plans. not stumble blindfold into a no-deal Brexit. It therefore has our strong support. No deal would also immediately end a whole raft of mutually beneficial mechanisms for security co-operation, including data sharing, police co-operation and 4 pm extradition. As a nation and as individuals, we would Lord Kerr of Kinlochard (CB): I agree that Mr Johnson’s simply be less secure. Charge of the Light Brigade, do or die bravado risks A no-deal Brexit would also preclude any involvement disguising quite how momentous is the decision that in all the mechanisms that project a shared European he seems to contemplate with such insouciance. It is voice in international affairs, whether on climate change, momentous for how the world sees us, for the prosperity the promotion of human rights or security and terrorism of our people and for the security and unity of the threats. These are the biggest issues facing the globe. kingdom. I leave these great themes to the two previous As last week’s G20 meeting showed, Europe’s is the speakers. They have been well addressed. I will make only powerful voice advocating policies in these areas four simple, factual and afraid rather familiar points that we and the Government strongly support, because and add two footnotes. My intention is simply to draw they reflect our values as a liberal democracy. Any sort attention to the gravity of the step being considered of Brexit, but particularly one without a deal, would with such surprising insouciance. diminish our influence in resolving them. It would On fact one, the cliff edge, the noble Baroness, also threaten the union, with inevitable renewed calls Lady Smith, has already said that without a withdrawal for Scottish independence and more credible calls for agreement there is no transition period. She is right, a border poll in Northern Ireland. and even Mr Johnson has now spotted that. I am less These are some of the costs of a no-deal Brexit, but sure that everyone understands that, if the Article 50 what about the benefits? Everybody accepts that there process ends on 31 October—and both contenders for would be net costs in the short term, and Jeremy Hunt No. 10 are against extending it—there is no way in for one is completely relaxed at the prospect of looking which a transition period can be revived. The concept people in the eye and telling them that no deal means is dead because the concept is only in Article 50. Once the loss of their job or their business. But beyond this Article 50 is discharged, there is no relevant legal base immediate pain, for some the sunny uplands beckon. in the treaty, no specific article about ex-partnership However, this nirvana is ill defined, devoid of specifics relationships, and no relevant provision in the articles and wholly unsupported by any credible analysis. The dealing with relations with third countries. 1451 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[3 JULY 2019] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1452

Mrs May’s withdrawal agreement is now denounced have to persuade the others to seek a concession from by both contenders—both the one who voted for it us: it could insist. EU positions, up until now a majority- and the one who voted for it and against it. But if it is determined highest common factor of member-state dead and if it is replaced by no deal, so is gradual positions, will become a unanimity-determined lowest transition. The cliff edge is a real crash out—it means common multiple of member-state demands. Life will crash out, straight down, on 31 October. be a little harder for our negotiators when the rules of the game change on 31 October. The second fact is that everyone I think now accepts that the decision to start the Article 50 process was a My first footnote is this: if, acting on Mr Johnson’s revocable decision, but I am not sure that everyone yet proposal, we decide to withhold some or all of the understands that the decision to end the process is an money, the negotiations will not start. The EU runs on irrevocable decision. Article 50 spells out that, once law. We made legally binding commitments, and the the process ends, a member state cannot revive its total has been jointly computed and agreed by our membership, either wholly or in part; it can only apply Prime Minister. Were we to resile, it would be self- de novo under Article 49 for accession. So there is no defeating. It would not assist the negotiations to do ladder back up the cliff after 31 October. so: it would prevent them. Equally, the 27 will not, in my view, agree to drop or time-limit the backstop. For the third fact, I am sorry that I will have to They take seriously their commitment to the Good mention that GATT Article 24 Clause 5(b), even though Friday agreement—and outside Article 50, it takes the Government—and I pay tribute to the Minister—the only one of them to take a stand. Bank of England, the WTO and the EU Commission have all rightly pointed to its irrelevance on 31 October. My final footnote is this: an Article 50 agreement Weand the EU could not maintain the mutual tariff-free does not require 27 national ratifications. A mixed trade that Mr Johnson says he wants without having agreement, such as any future agreement that we night to eliminate all tariffs on all our trade with all WTO have, will do. The Canadian agreement got stuck in members. Clause 5(b) provides a glide path towards a the Wallonian Parliament; the Ukrainian agreement customs union or a free trade agreement, provided required a referendum in the Netherlands.The referendum that the destination is agreed and the schedule of requirement has two effects.First, it makes the negotiators reductions is approved, but it has never been used for a look over their shoulders. They feel domestic pressure move in the opposite direction. The application would to use the veto given to them by the unanimity rule. have to be made jointly by us and the EU, and the EU Secondly,it adds a couple of years—perhaps more—after would not join us because it thinks that the application the deal is struck, for national ratification procedures, would fail and because there is no legal basis in the referendums or whatever. A no-deal Brexit is not just treaty that it could use to do so. an event: it is a process. Leaving on 31 October would condemn us to a protracted period—five, seven, I do It follows that on 31 October we would either have not know how many years—of continuing no deal. to build a tariff wall against imports from our largest I cannot see how Mr Johnson and Mr Hunt can tell supplier, or remove all our tariff walls against all us that that is what people voted for in 2016. In suppliers, or be in breach of WTO rules—from the yesterday’s Times, Rachel Sylvester recalled the official start, on 31 October. The EU has long since said what Vote Leave campaign leaflet, ruling out no deal. The it would do in that situation. If we go with no deal, the leaflet said: EU’s common external tariff will apply to us from “Taking back control is a careful change, not a sudden stop—we day 1. There is no parachute for our importers or our will negotiate the terms of a new deal before we start any … exporters—for any of our traders there is no parachute. process to leave”. It will be our biggest ever step away from free trade on Now we have Mr Johnson saying that we should end it 31 October. with no negotiated deal. I think we know what electorate My last fact is that the legal base on which the EU he is appealing to, but I cannot accept that it would be could then negotiate a new relationship us would be undemocratic to put his proposal to a wider electorate. Article 218, perhaps combined with Article 207 and It is so different from what he was saying three years maybe also Article 217. We would then find ourselves ago that it must be right that Parliament, when it is mourning the lost protection of Article 50. Under required to take the no-deal decision, is made fully Article 50, the position of the 27 is decided by qualified aware of the costs and implications before irrevocable majority, meaning that we cannot be held to ransom decisions are taken that would have infinite effect and by any single member state. After 31 October, we run for many years. So I strongly support the Motion could be. Since an Article 217 and 218 agreement in the name of the noble Baroness. would be a mixed agreement, including matters not of EU member-state competence, EU positions would 4.09 pm require unanimity. Of the first three files that the EU has said that we would have to look at in negotiations— Lord Howell of Guildford (Con): My Lords, I declare citizens’ rights, the money and the backstop—at least an interest as an adviser to two major Japanese companies. two raise issues well outside exclusive EU competence. We have heard three impressive speeches from one So the whole negotiation could stall immediately. If a point of view, and it is no surprise that I shall strike a single member state were unhappy about how we slightly different note in what I have to say about the proposed to treat its nationals or had some unrelated problems we confront. I shall vote against the proposal point, perhaps about fisheries, that it wanted to press for yet another committee—we seem to live in a world upon us, once outside the EU, unprotected by Article 50 of committees—and against the opposition Motion rules, we would find that no member of the 27 would because it aims at the wrong target at the moment. 1453 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[LORDS] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1454

[LORD HOWELL OF GUILDFORD] Europe, so there is no immediate disruption and smashing There is no sufficiently deep thought behind it and, up of supply lines. We have the time and flexibility to frankly, I do not think it does credit to the great social complete our practical and sensible immigration controls, democrat element in the Labour Party which is vital to which are badly needed. the nation’s political health, or used to be. It is wrong because the whole idea and concept of a crude, tear-away, The ECJ has no locus in the EEA, although we “one leap and we’re free” Brexit on or by 31 October would be temporarily under the EEA court’s much is, as I shall show, impossible. It is a chimera, and lighter, consensus-based jurisdiction. We would pay shouting about deadlines and delivery, however loud, the EU for our legal obligations on leaving, as is will not make it otherwise. proper, but buy only into the other EU programmes that we want to join. We would have time to sort out The reasons for this basic reality are twofold: there the hopeless bind into which Dublin has talked itself, are political aspects and there are technical aspects. where simultaneously it must install border controls at On the political side, first, it is obvious that the other the insistence of Brussels, as an EU member, when of place will move heaven and earth to prevent a crude, course that is the very last thing that the Dublin break-away no deal. Secondly, there are just too many Government want to do. There were always ways inescapable legislative aspects to unravel to make it round this dilemma, even with existing technology—let possible in the time available before 31 October. We alone new technology—but they were always going to just cannot expect systems of law and procedures take time to work out. I agree with many in this House which have grown together over 45 years, however who believe that we should be generous and helpful to irritating and pointless they have become, to be wrenched the Irish Republic in its agonising choice.Our membership apart or replaced in a few weeks or days. Thirdly, a of the EEA for 18 months would give time for that. walk-away no-deal Brexit on 31 October requires half a dozen or more major Bills, according to the House The essential point to grasp is that it is going to of Commons Library, simply to make it possible to happen anyway, and by default. Calling it a no deal is proceed lawfully in daily business covering trade, a complete misnomer, which is why I question the agriculture, fisheries, immigration rules, social service opposition Motion. Even if nothing is done, we become— administration, financial services and a whole lot else. for a limited time—a non-EU member of the EEA, It is physically impossible to fit all that in before the giving notice of our intention to leave in due course. October date. Those are the political facts. They are This is where we will find ourselves, like it or not. If opinions really, but they are certainly called facts. Brussels tries to force us out of the EEA treaty we will However, it is the technical impossibilities of a have ample recourse for this, frankly, unreasonableness no-deal exit in the hard, brutal sense which are even through the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. more interesting and conclusive. If on 31 October we Why should it do that? This orderly and gradual leave the Lisbon treaty complex for good under the procedure is utterly in its interests, step by step. The Article 50 procedure, we remain by default within the silly mistake of the two prime ministerial candidates is European Economic Area agreement treaty, which is a to keep depicting, in blood-curdling terms, what might multilateral treaty between states.No process to withdraw happen as a no deal when, in fact, a most elaborate set from the EEA under Article 127 has been triggered, of deals and new arrangements will have to happen whatever some Brussels lawyers, or indeed our own once we withdraw from the EU treaties on 31 October. Civil Service advisers, may say.Weremain as a contracting It reconciles the 31st imperative with realism, orderliness partner within the EEA treaty structure, which means and a step-by-step approach. participating provisionally, after leaving on 31 October, in the single market and leaving whenever we chose I know—and others have observed and will observe— later, having given 12 months’ notice. That timing that Boris Johnson has said that the chances of a hard would be entirely up to us. no deal happening are a million to one against. He is wrong. There is no chance at all of a hard-line no deal. I ask your Lordships to give thought to some of the No such thing exists or can occur. In fact, the whole comments of the noble Lord, Lord Owen, who is not vocabulary of hard Brexit versus soft Brexit, so beloved in his place, who has gone into this very profoundly, by the BBC and others, is going to become irrelevant that for a temporary or provisional staging post post- and redundant against what actually will happen if we Brexit, this is a quite comfortable place to be. It gives just move on to a fixed transition period, provisionally us a just as good—in fact, a better—space than the within the EEA for 18 months or so, with a complex much-disliked withdrawal treaty and provides extensive series of deals unfolding. freedoms to tackle the next phase of all the key issues, both security and economic, in the period ahead. In If the ERG crew in my party in the other place this period, we can have unrestrained powers to make cannot accept this near-default reality position under treaties and trade agreements, just as Norway has in a new leader and would prefer suicide, then they are to the EEA. We can carry on setting our global agenda. be pitied. A general election would certainly follow, We can duly leave the EU by 31 October and the EEA wiping most of them away and leaving them to be by, say, 31 December 2020, but it would be entirely our condemned by history. As for the opposition Motion say-so, not anybody else’s. We can start the long before us, instead of this sterile jousting about something process of fisheries and agricultural reform on our that cannot happen, we should remember something own lines. Our trading terms with the rest of the EU that JS Mill wrote long ago about our politics that, will remain tariff-free in the single market for the when all is said and done, the contending parties of interim transition, while we design a new FTA with this nation share the truth between them. 1455 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[3 JULY 2019] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1456

4.18 pm One-third of the value of cross-border trade is in agri-food, and there is simply no way of maintaining Lord Hain (Lab): My Lords, I appeal to both Boris the frictionless trade and processing of such goods— Johnson and Jeremy Hunt—more in hope than in including all of Northern Ireland’s fresh milk, which is expectation, I fear—to read the cogent, cool and processed in the Republic—across the border in a indisputable speech of the noble Lord, Lord Kerr. It no-deal scenario. The import duties, plus detailed would be a mercy for us all, if they did. rules that require certification, document inspections One of the principles set out in the Prime Minister’s and checks on agri-food products crossing the border, letter triggering Article 50 was that the UK’s withdrawal will all but cripple the industry. Ninety-four per cent from the EU would cause no harm to the Republic of of those who trade across the Irish border are small or Ireland. This is vital because the bilateral relationship micro-enterprises. Few, if any, of these have the capacity between our Government and the Republic’s is the or resources to implement the measures needed in a lynchpin of the 1998 Good Friday agreement and the cliff-edge Brexit—still less the resources to pay sudden peace process.Yet a no-deal Brexit would have profoundly new tariffs. damaging consequences for both the Republic of Ireland One of the most likely means of temporarily managing and Northern Ireland, which voted by 56% to 44% to the catastrophic fallout for Northern Ireland would be remain in the EU in 2016. for the UK and the EU to invoke Article XXI(b)(iii) of Back in late 2010, the coalition Government proposed GATT—the so-called “security clause”. This would a small bilateral loan to the Republic at the height of allow exemption from the responsibility to properly the financial crisis. The Chancellor George Osborne enforce a customs border on the grounds that the then said: reimposition of customs controls would pose a risk to “I judge this to be in Britain’s national interest … Ireland the peace process. However, in so doing, we would be accounts for 5% of Britain’s total exports … we export more to essentially declaring Northern Ireland unstable, insecure Ireland than to Brazil, Russia, India and China put together. and unfit for normal trading or investment—in other Ireland is the only country with which we share a land border, and words, doing the dirty work of the dissident republican in Northern Ireland our economies are particularly linked, with terrorists for them. two-fifths of their exports going to the Republic”—[Official Report, Commons, 22/10/10; col. 38.]. As your Lordships’Select Committee on the European Union has pointed out, the costs and disruptions from Those are the words of the former Chancellor. Fully the customs requirements, including tariffs, that would two-fifths of Northern Ireland’s exports go to the flow from trading under the very WTO rules that hard Republic. Brexiteers,including potentially our future Prime Minister, Ireland’s economy repaid the loan and has bounced champion, back since those dark days of 2010. Our fifth largest “could severely affect the border and UK-Irish relations”. export destination has increased its trade with us to The Good Friday agreement, recognised as a treaty over £50 billion a year; 200,000 jobs here in Britain are under international law, brought peace after decades with Irish companies; 60,000 directors of UK companies of horrific conflict, but it would be catastrophically are Irish citizens; and the Dublin-London air route is damaged by no deal. the world’s second busiest. With no deal, the Republic officially foresees up to 85,000 job losses, just at the Both the Tory leader candidates yesterday spuriously point where the Irish economy has reached full suggested that novel, but so far completely unidentified, employment. A hard-earned return to budget surplus technology can prevent a hard border, but unless there will reverse back into a deficit, with knock-on effects are common trade regulations and customs rules on for public services and infrastructure investment, and either side of the border,no amount of fancy,undeveloped of course serious damage for its close neighbour, technology can resolve the problem. It is not the Northern Ireland. backstop but a no-deal Brexit that will threaten the union between Northern Ireland and the rest of If Brexit really does have to happen, I will agree the UK, which is a major reason why no deal must be with the spirit and letter of the backstop stopped, and stopped now. arrangements—an insurance policy to ensure that the border stays open at all costs. Make no mistake: no deal means a hard border—a legal requirement of WTO, and therefore EU, external frontier rules. The 4.25 pm impact on Northern Ireland and its fragile economy Lord Paddick (LD): My Lords, the noble Baroness, would be grave. The head of the Northern Ireland Lady Smith of Basildon, asked for facts. In January Civil Service, in measured words, wrote to the political 2017, the National Crime Agency warned the All-Party parties of Northern Ireland earlier this year: Parliamentary Group on Policing and Security what “The consequences of material business failure as a result of a would be lost if we left the EU without a deal. Being a ‘no-deal’ exit, combined with changes to everyday life and potential trained police officer, I took contemporaneous notes. border frictions could well have a profound and long-lasting These are the facts: we would lose the Schengen impact on society ... a no-deal exit could result in additional challenges for the police”. Information System, meaning that police officers would no longer be able to carry out checks via the police Wales’s key port of Holyhead, the third busiest port national computer on people and vehicles on the in the UK, its work overwhelmingly with Ireland, streets of the UK, for those wanted under the European would be especially badly hit. As the Welsh First arrest warrant, for missing people, for travelling sex Minister, Mark Drakeford, said, offenders, or for those suspected of being involved in “a no-deal Brexit would be catastrophic for the Welsh economy”. terrorism, anywhere in the EU. 1457 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[LORDS] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1458

[LORD PADDICK] have been appreciated by many of the parties in the We would lose the European arrest warrant. Norway Northern Ireland Assembly. We have had this and Iceland want to be part of the European arrest extraordinary dichotomy that, on the one hand, 56% warrant. They will not get full access to it, because it is of the people of Northern Ireland voted to remain against the constitution of countries such as Germany and, on the other,their only parliamentary representatives to extradite their nationals to non-EU states. They who take their seats in Westminster are leavers. When applied in 2001 and agreement was reached in 2006, the history of this period comes to be written, I think but it is yet to be implemented. that this will be seen as one of the most significant We would no longer be a member of Europol, to facts. which the UK is one of the biggest contributors. It Having been in Parliament for just over 49 years, I currently has a British director and 700 staff producing am very depressed for our country as we approach pan-European action plans and organised crime threat 31 October. Of course, I hope fervently that a deal can assessments. Third-party countries have only partial be done. Like many remainers on this side of the access and play no part in its leadership. The UK House and on the Cross Benches, I would have accepted would become a third-party country. the Prime Minister’s deal, as negotiated by Olly Robbins, We would lose ECRIS, a secure messaging system to whom the Leader of the Opposition referred in her where criminal convictions in the courts of one country speech. I wish Her Majesty’s Opposition in the other are shared across the EU. It is also used to analyse place had realised that you cannot leave an institution convictions to determine patterns of offending. It will and retain all the benefits of membership. This was a be far more difficult for us to stop foreign criminals deal negotiated by a determined and expert team, entering the UK because we will not necessarily know agreed by both sides; Parliament should have that they have convictions. accepted it. We would lose Prüm, a system that rapidly compares We are where we are, but where is that? I am DNA, fingerprints and vehicle registrations across the ashamed for my party because of the way we are EU; for example, a DNA profile found at a UK crime conducting the leadership election. It should have scene can be compared with databases of those convicted been decided in the other place. I do not know what across the EU within a few seconds or up to 24 hours. the result would have been, but whoever had been We would have to fall back on alternative arrangements elected Prime Minister—elected leader of the party under Interpol, which take months; some are never and gone to the Queen to receive the seals of office— replied to. should have been working now. We are wasting time We would lose access to cross-border surveillance that we do not have to waste. I thought it grotesque—I where suspected criminals are kept under surveillance use the word deliberately—that yesterday, when we in other EU countries and EU suspects are kept under had more news of the gravest crisis in Hong Kong surveillance in the UK. For every one request from the since the handover,our Foreign Secretary,who I personally EU, the UK makes seven requests for such assistance admire and like very much, was in Northern Ireland to the EU. We would also lose joint investigation with Mr Boris Johnson, appealing for the party vote. teams that operate under the Eurojust process to The noble Baroness, Lady Smith of Basildon, said tackle pan-European crime. quite rightly that we are dealing with 0.3% of the The existing legislative framework—for example, electorate, but in Northern Ireland we are dealing with common data protection standards and the European 500 paid-up members of the Conservative Party. What Court of Justice to resolve disputes—enables greater a distortion of priorities, an appalling spectacle and and more effective law enforcement co-operation. A a national disgrace that we should be conducting no-deal Brexit, as my noble friend Lord Newby said, this election among 160,000 people in the whole of would result in the UK being less safe and less secure. I the United Kingdom when we desperately need a am confident that a Joint Committee will confirm Government. I honour Theresa May, but she is a lame these facts. duck Prime Minister and the Government are in a state of suspended animation while this goes on, with 4.29 pm nobody knowing who will occupy which posts after Lord Cormack (Con): My Lords, I am glad to the votes have been counted. I appeal to those who follow the noble Lord, Lord Paddick, and particularly control the rule-making in my party—a party that I glad to give unequivocal support to the Motion tabled have hitherto always been proud to belong to and to by the Leader of the Opposition; I am just sorry that it which I have belonged for 63 years—to realise that this has taken so long. is not the way to choose a Prime Minister. It may be the way to choose a Leader of the Opposition but not Three years ago, in the wake of a referendum that a Prime Minister. had divided our country almost equally, I told your Lordships’ House that we needed a Parliament that What can we now do? The answer is: not a great could come together and look at the facts. I was deal. I wish I could share the sanguine approach of anxious to have an innovation: a Grand Committee of my noble friend Lord Howell of Guildford. I admire both Houses. It could have been done. I like to think him greatly; he has done great service in both Houses that had it been done, we might not be in quite the of Parliament. He is just stepping down, having had mess that we are in today. Certainly, were it not for the a very distinguished period as chairman of our ending of the Northern Ireland Assembly and Executive, International Relations Committee, and we are all in we would not be in this mess. Many of the points his debt. I hope he is right in all that he said, but I fear made cogently by the noble Lord, Lord Hain, would he is too optimistic. 1459 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[3 JULY 2019] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1460

What could a committee of both Houses do, composed The answer to the first question, about the strength of good men and true, as it would be, with a great deal of Britishness in Scotland 50 years ago, is complex, of expertise from your Lordships’ House? The noble but I suggest it included the personal experience and Lord, Lord Kerr of Kinlochard, would have to be a fresh memories of common struggle and sacrifice member of it so we would have to give him his summer throughout the United Kingdom, especially in World holiday, but it is just possible that it could produce a War 2; the lingering suspicions, especially in that populous persuasive report that would make whichever candidate west of Scotland, of the right-wing and in particular emerges as the winner, and as the new Prime Minister, the anti-Irish-immigrant origins of the SNP; the resultant realise that above all his responsibility was to the fear that a separation would threaten the Ulsterisation nation. of Scotland and the ascendancy of the majority over To chase the votes of the sort of people who turned the minority; the self-interest in jobs provided by their backs in the European Parliament yesterday is British-wide industries in coal, steel, shipbuilding and totally shameful. so on; the solidarity consequently arising through the Britain-wide trade union movement and fellow employees in these industries; and, above all, the recognition that The Minister of State, Department for Exiting the for a nation of 6 million, a United Kingdom of European Union (Lord Callanan) (Con): The Liberals 60 million provided the framework for economic were wearing yellow T-shirts. opportunity, security and stability, in recent decades enhanced by membership of the European Union’s Lord Cormack: I did not approve of the sartorial additional 440 million people. elegance of the Liberals but at least I could applaud That was the position 50 years ago. What has their sentiments. Their sartorial elegance is not always changed? Well, social, economic and political radical what it might be but their sentiments were sound. change has happened. The experiences of the common However, the turning of the back was a shameful sacrifices during World War 2 have diminished decade gesture, and one of which no true Brit could possibly by decade. Nationalism and the SNP have moved from be proud. the right to the centre-left of politics, abandoning the I want to be proud of my party again. I will always anti-Irish-immigrant leanings, towards a more inclusive be proud of my country, but at the moment I am nationalism. The massive expansion of educational ashamed for my country. provision, opened up by the Labour Governments of the 1960s and 1970s and made available irrespective of 4.37 pm class or ethnic background, and the growth of white-collar Lord Reid of Cardowan (Lab): My Lords, for the jobs, both provided opportunities for social advance first time in my life I fear that we are marching steadily hitherto denied, and as a result of that came the towards the break-up of the United Kingdom. I want growing confidence and diminished fear of the ascendancy to spend some time today on the subject of Scotland of one group over another. I was a beneficiary of some and its place in the United Kingdom, and the implications of those changes. of a no-deal Brexit for that relationship. To do that, I Then, from 1979, the political, social and economic want to go back a number of decades to orientate effects of Thatcherism, from massive unemployment ourselves to what might happen. to the experimental poll tax—remember that Scotland To state the obvious, Scotland is a nation. It is a was chosen as the guinea pig—had a profound impact nation with commonly recognised borders, a common on the collective Scottish consciousness. The self-evident thread of history and, above all, a national consciousness. employment benefits of the great British industries Over the last few centuries Scotland has obviously disappeared. British Steel has gone, British Coal has been a nation inside a larger nation state—within gone, British shipbuilding has all but gone, and there the United Kingdom—so the question of national are many others. With the disappearance of these consciousness is therefore very complex, with the industries and jobs went the Britain-wide solidarity development over time of what Professor John which the employees and the trade unions afforded. Mackintosh MP once called the “dual consciousness” Those changes are not comprehensive but they are of the Scottish people: part-Scottish, part-British. That significant, and they led to a referendum result in 2014 balance has varied from time to time, as might be where almost 50% of people in Scotland voted to expected, but it has always been a balance. Devolution separate from the UK. did not create that national consciousness; it was the This is the warning that I give to this Chamber, and response to its existence. to my colleagues in all parties in the other House. Now, as we countenance Brexit, I want to ask two There were only two things remaining that stopped questions. First, why, as late as the 1950s and 1960s, that 45% becoming over 50%. One was devolution was there such a significant feeling of Britishness in itself, which afforded the Scots significant control over that balance and such an antipathy towards separation, their own affairs, but more important than anything especially in the populous west of Scotland, which else was—and remains—the perceived benefit of economic acted as a block for many years on separatist ambitions opportunity and stability from remaining inside the but which, counterintuitively,contains the most significant UK, a nation state of 60 million people, and a gateway number of the descendants of Irish immigrants, who to the 500-million market of the European Union. might have been assumed to have the least affection Economic opportunity, security and stability have been for the Crown, the union and the union jack? Secondly, the crucial factor from 1707, when Scotland joined the what has changed since, and what implications do union after the disastrous economic failings of the those changes have as we countenance Brexit? Darien scheme, to 2007, when the RBS went down 1461 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[LORDS] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1462

[LORD REID OF CARDOWAN] The first is the legislation gap: of six Brexit Bills with a greater loss than Scotland’s annual GDP. They that the Government said in February needed to be are the crucial pivot on which the partnership of passed to prepare for no deal, only one has been nations which constitute the United Kingdom now enacted. Will we have the powers we need to regulate hinges, but it is that very pivot that is under threat trade, fisheries, immigration and financial services? from Brexit. Of course a Boris Johnson leadership Secondly, is there reality in the notion of mini-deals would be bad for unity—that leadership with Brexit with the EU? This is now being put about as a managed would be even worse—but a Boris Johnson leadership no deal, or at least as adequate mitigation for no deal. tied to a no-deal Brexit is a disaster waiting to happen There is, I fear, no reality in the idea that we will for the unity of the United Kingdom, precisely because automatically remain members of the EEA, desirable it threatens that economic opportunity and stability. though that may be, for the simple reason that we will The Government can of course ignore what I say, meet neither of the conditions—membership of the what Gordon Brown says, what Professor Tom Devine— EU or of EFTA. who knows more about Scotland than anyone in either The third development is the likely actions of the Chamber—says, or what John Curtice says. They can EU to defend its new customs and regulatory border even ignore—my God—what Liam Fox says. Today, in Ireland. her own Government can choose to ignore what the The fourth is the general state of preparedness. Was Prime Minister is about to say in Scotland. Indeed, it the Institute for Government right in its recent assessment may be that the Conservative membership referred to that the Government are as unlikely to be ready for no by the noble Lord, Lord Cormack, simply does not deal in October as they were in March? care. In fact it is certain that it does not care: a recent survey suggested that the membership would prefer a The fifth issue to consider is the impact on all this no-deal Brexit to the retention of Scotland or Northern of recent departures from the Civil Service, including Ireland inside the United Kingdom. So be it. Be the Permanent Secretary of DExEU, Philip Rycroft, careful, however, what you wish for, and please take the chief of no deal, Tom Shinner, Karen Wheeler of heed of the warnings. It would be a supremely tragic HMRC and the chief negotiator Olly Robbins. irony if a course of action nominally designed to The economic and constitutional aspects of no deal restore the sovereignty of the United Kingdom were attract most of the attention—understandably so. I the very vehicle that ripped it apart. Let us think on hope, however, that, as the noble Lord, Lord Paddick, the implications of that. said, the committee will also look at the implications for our safety and security. I used to observe police officers at Dover, their hand-held devices telling them 4.46 pm in real time via the SIS II system when incoming Lord Anderson of Ipswich (CB): My Lords, it is an passengers were on continental crime and terrorism honour to follow the noble Lord. watch lists. That capability along with many others, Two weeks ago, YouGov asked almost 1,700 people from the exchange of DNA profiles and passenger about the consequences of a no-deal Brexit. The answers name records to a functioning system of extradition revealed a gulf that is striking even by current standards. within Europe, will simply lapse without a further Of those who voted remain, 71% anticipated serious deal. We will lose the advantages of a security union, damage to the economy and only 9% did not. Among which, as the Centre for European Reform reported leave voters—with neat but depressing symmetry—serious last month, has helped the EU achieve more on security damage was expected by just 10%, and not expected in the past two years than in the preceding decade. by 70%. Such indicators of tribal loyalty can lead Perhaps that is why Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu, fair-minded people to fatalism or despair. However, it who leads on terrorism for the Met, has described a is in just such circumstances that clear heads, reliable no-deal Brexit as “incredibly concerning” and why the evidence and the power of reason are most needed. National Security Adviser told the Cabinet unequivocally in a letter leaked in April that it would leave the UK As we approach October, which some say may be “less safe”. the most momentous month in our recent history—there is stiff competition—we have the chance to ensure that Some have said that it is a million to one, but the the constantly changing picture on no-deal Brexit is bookies were offering odds this morning of 2:1 on a informed not just by spin, leaks and written statements no-deal Brexit in 2019. Politicians and the public need but by a hard-fought parliamentary assessment, based to know the facts, not as they were in the spring but as on the interrogation of those most closely involved, they will be in the autumn. Everyone likes a summer that will neither exaggerate nor pull its punches. The holiday, but no-deal preparations are being strenuously noble Lord, Lord Howell of Guildford, referred to urged on others. We in Parliament should not neglect “yet another committee”. Well, I read with admiration our own and that is why I shall support this Motion. the reports of our EU Committee, its sub-committees and the Exiting the EU Committee of the House of 4.51 pm Commons. They have already convincingly covered much of the ground. However, as no deal continues its Lord Bridges of Headley (Con): My Lords, as we all journey over the next three months, from table-top know, in 121 days we are due to leave the European exercise to looming reality, further and more precise Union with or without a deal. While I entirely agree assessments will be needed. Here are five current that we need more facts about the implications of no developments that the proposed Joint Committee could deal, I part company with the noble Baroness on this usefully consider. Motion because I believe we cannot spend those precious 1463 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[3 JULY 2019] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1464 days creating committees, calling for evidence, questioning primary legislation still need to be passed if our statute Ministers and re-examining issues that have, if we are book is to function effectively on day one, were we to honest, been debated many times before. What is leave without a deal? My understanding, as the noble needed is something altogether simpler,more fundamental Lord said, is that in February the Government said and a lot more urgent. they needed to pass six more Bills. Since then, however, even though today we are debating wild animals in What people want to know, very simply, is how no circuses, I understand that only one of these Brexit deal would affect them, what has been done to prepare Bills has made it on to the statute book. If that for no deal, what still needs to be done, and what legislation cannot be passed, we need to know whether more government, businesses and individuals should there are means to work around those problems. do. To give the Government credit, a lot has been done to prepare for no deal. There have been at least Then there is the Government’s proposed tariff 750 communications of one sort or another since schedule that would apply in the case of leaving the October alone. Print them off and you would have a EU without a deal. That still needs to be approved by compost heap of press releases, reports and statements. Parliament: when will it be passed? As for EU trade That is precisely my point. and other agreements, how many of these deals have As we clatter towards 31 October, Parliament and now been grandfathered over? What are the consequences the country must be given now—not in September—a of our failing to grandfather over these agreements, comprehensive summary that sets out clearly our nation’s such as those with Canada and Japan? Again, I ask: overall preparedness. This summary should cover are there workarounds? We know that the EU and three broad areas, a few of which the noble Lord, member states have been preparing for no deal. Will Lord Anderson, spoke of: government preparedness, the Government reciprocate in those areas where the business preparedness and legislative preparedness. EU has created arrangements to mitigate disruption? Let me outline just some of the major issues that we Into this category falls the all-important and much need to know about. debated issue of Article XXIV of GATT, about which the noble Lord, Lord Kerr, spoke with great authority. First, on government preparedness, how well prepared We need to know the Government’s approach to this. are the United Kingdom Government, including the devolved Administrations and our regulators, to keep My reading of it is that both the EU and the the movement of people, goods, transport and services, UK—the contracting parties—will need to come an including—crucially—data, flowing in the event of no agreement if trade in goods is to continue as now. The deal? Are our regulators as confident as they can be UK and EU will also need to come to an agreement that enough has been done to safeguard stability, covering services if Article V of the GATS is to be especially financial stability? Are our police and security triggered. What is more, my understanding is that services ready for the changes of which the noble neither Article XXIV nor Article V covers issues such Lord, Lord Paddick, spoke? More specifically,in February, as mutual recognition of standards and regulations the NAO said that six out of the eight critical IT for goods and services, rules of origin, participation in systems remained at risk of not being ready for a institutions such as Euratom, or, very importantly, no-deal outcome in March. What is their status now? security co-operation. So to achieve a seamless no-deal If they are not ready, what are the consequences? As transition in which the status quo is maintained will the noble Lord, Lord Hain, asked, what precisely will indeed, as the noble Lord, Lord Kerr, so rightly said, happen on the Irish border? Then there is the channel. be a matter for negotiation, and we know the EU’s How well prepared are our channel ports for handling negotiating position as it stands today.Monsieur Barnier roll-on roll-off freight in the event of no deal? Last has told us: week, Peter Foster, the excellent European editor of the Daily Telegraph, reported that he had been told by “We would not discuss anything with the UK until there is an the Road Haulage Association that any truck without agreement for Ireland and Northern Ireland, as well as for citizens’ the right paperwork would not be allowed on to a rights and the financial settlement”. ferry at Dover. Is this the case? In other words, until we have agreed what is essentially That brings me to the second topic that the summary in the existing withdrawal agreement, there can be no should cover: business preparedness. How well prepared further negotiation. are our major sectors, especially those with complex supply chains such as pharmaceuticals, food, automotive All this has a direct bearing on our no-deal and aerospace, for no deal? In February,the Government preparations. If we leave with nothing on 31 October, assessed the risk in relation to trader readiness as red. the longer it takes to agree with the EU simply to As of 26 May, 69,000 firms had signed up for EORI freeze current trading arrangements, the longer we status—fewer than one-third of the 240,000 EU-trading will be trading with the EU on pure WTO terms, firms estimated to need one. EORI status is also which will indeed have a further impact on our no-deal needed if a firm is to participate in the Government’s preparedness. So this is the summary we need: a transitional simplified procedures scheme. By the end document that sets out, for the public and for Parliament, of May, just 17,800 firms had applied for the scheme. how well prepared we are and what more needs to be What is the status now? done. We have just 121 days to go until we are due to leave, so this comprehensive summary should be prepared I could go on and on, but let me turn to the next now and be published before Parliament rises for the topic—which the noble Lord, Lord Anderson, referred summer. Ignorance breeds fear; honesty breeds trust. to—of legislative preparedness. How many pieces of We need the facts and we need them now. 1465 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[LORDS] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1466

4.58 pm I want to echo two things said by the noble Lord, Lord Cormack: first, the shame of yesterday in the Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Lab): My Lords, as I am European Parliament—that British MEPs could do going to make some mention of NHS staffing issues I what they did; secondly, to go back to what he said should remind the House of my membership of the three years ago, because this seems to be at the heart of GMC board. the problems we face. It was a narrow referendum result, but Mrs May’s Government made no attempt The noble Lord, Lord Bridges, in a very powerful at that time to pull the country together. Through the speech, disagreed with the Motion before us. I would arbitrary declaration of Article 50 and the red lines say to him that he has raised very important matters, which were discussed with no one outside her narrow but the problem we have is that there is simply no sign inner circle, we have reached this position of desperate of the Government responding to what he has asked straits for our country. for.Wehave a paralysed Government with two candidates for the leadership of our country going around making I realise that Mr Johnson and Mr Hunt seem to the most irresponsible statements and promises, and at have a very light connection to economic facts, but the moment Parliament is left bereft of what to do. when it comes to just two sectors that I am most That is why this modest proposal to establish a Joint concerned about—the automotive industry and the Select Committee is worthy of support. But, goodness health service—the consequences of no deal are me, if this were to be accepted by the other place, it devastating. I know that the Government, or sections would have to get on with it. I agree absolutely with of it, are suspicious of the Bank of England and the the noble Lord; the issues he raised are so serious that CBI, and I know that they think they know better the idea that we can wait another few weeks before we than the people running companies who actually have actually get down to it frightens me and many others. to deal and trade globally. However, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders spelled out the This Select Committee could also examine the potential of a £50,000 per minute cost of hard Brexit contention of the noble Lord, Lord Howell, that it will border delays to UK automotive manufacturers, the in fact be impossible to leave in one step. All I can say consequence of which is that we will be forced out of is that I hope he is right. However, given that both being one of the top 10 global exporters, with a Mr Johnson and Mr Hunt have painted themselves so devastating impact on our economy. tightly into a corner, the huge risk is surely where we When we look at the health service, it is the same will be if they reach that conclusion. We could reach a story. Apart from issues to do with safety, dealing with situation where government becomes almost impossible. pandemics, our exclusion from a whole host of European I have been listening to the two candidates; have organisations, the risk of NHS staff not being recruited noble Lords totted up the bill? There are tax cuts for from the EU and our inability to replace them from the rich, slashing of corporation tax, stamp duty elsewhere, what we also put at risk is our whole life reductions, no-deal relief programmes for farmers and sciences sector. Talking to academics or the fisher fleets, pay rises for public sector workers, more pharmaceutical industry, we hear that there has already for police,education and defence,and major infrastructure been a squeeze on the number of people coming to spending. We are told that this is all to come from the work in our country, partly because of Brexit and £26 billion of fiscal firepower that the Chancellor has partly because of the associated actions of the Home reserved in case of a no-deal Brexit. As the Chancellor— Office and its very restrictive immigration policies. and he still is the Chancellor and carries some authority Putting this all together, we see two vital sectors of with many of us, even if not with members of the the economy—the motor car industry and the health Conservative Party—said yesterday, in the event of a service—facing dire consequences, and somehow we disruptive no-deal exit, there will be a hit to the are meant to say that it does not really matter because Exchequer of about £90 billion, which would have to it is in the greater interest of achieving Brexit. This is be factored into future spending and tax positions. sheer and utter madness. I believe that we in Parliament still have an opportunity to stop this and we have to do As Paul Johnson of the IFS has said, these what it takes. A Joint Select Committee is not a “extraordinary pledges”, adding up to tens of billions momentous step towards that, but it is an important of pounds, mean that they are willing to borrow more step none the less and I very much support it. and longer. If we do not get a deal, the economy will grow less quickly; we will lose that fiscal headroom that the Chancellor has made available and there will 5.06 pm certainly be no scope for spending increases or tax cuts. Lord Robathan (Con): My Lords, it is often customary to say what a good debate people have been having. As While we contemplate the folly of leaving the EU, it happens, on this occasion we have had some very the EU itself, after years of negotiation, has sealed a good speeches—of varying quality, of course, but trade deal with Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay, really very interesting—and although I may not have following the deals it has already sealed with Japan, agreed with them, I have found some very interesting South Korea and Canada. Where will the UK be? points made which deserve an answer. I am an optimist Isolated and picking up the scraps, a minnow up and always have been—but, like my noble friend Lord against powerful trading blocs—reduced, as we have Cormack, I am pretty depressed at the moment. I have seen from what Johnson and Hunt have been saying, been depressed for about two years about politics, to slashing regulation and business tax in a desperate perhaps longer, and the current situation is really attempt to keep the economy going. not good. 1467 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[3 JULY 2019] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1468

Brexit has turned some people in this country I have other quotes, but I will not bore the House with completely barking mad on both sides of the argument— them—the best of all is from the leader of the Liberal especially the Liberal Democrats, of course; I will Democrats. come to them in a minute, do not worry. We are not I say to the Liberal Democrats, who are here in properly prepared, as we have heard, for a no-deal force, that they have form on this. The noble Lord, Brexit and it is a great pity because some people, Lord Newby, who spoke eloquently, was on the Front including my noble friend Lord Bridges, I know worked Bench in 2008, and there is certainly one person here pretty hard to get us into a state where we would be in who stormed out of the House of Commons when a position to negotiate and leave in a better state. I can Nick Clegg led a stunt on 28 February, I think, to say absolutely categorically that I do not want no deal. protest against the fact that the amendment that the I particularly liked the optimistic point made by my Lib Dems had tabled to have a vote on a real referendum noble friend Lord Howell about the EEA and I hope was not accepted. That was in their manifesto of 2010. he is right, because I fear that that may be where we So when they say they want another referendum, let us end up going. Wehave heard some cataclysmic speeches, not pretend that that has always been their position. which again were pretty depressing, and I hope that I go back to the fact that we are not accountable. they were wrong, but this Motion I find somewhat Many of us here have never had to listen to the unedifying. It is frankly a political ruse. It is designed electorate, and we are not elected. I regret to say to to tie the hands of an incoming Prime Minister—and people here who do not like it that the electorate have for the long term. The noble Lord, Lord Hunt—who, spoken. We are in a hugely privileged position which by the way, was absolutely right about the divisions people in the country are not in, so we should not be that have been created—hinted that he would like to prepared—this is the point of the Motion—to tell the see Brexit stopped, as many people in this Chamber little people outside, to quote Vince Cable again, “Sorry would. guys, you’ve just got it wrong”. That would be very unwise. Noble Lords: Hear, hear. As I said, this debate has brought out some very interesting points that are worth listening to and should Lord Robathan: Thank you. This House is unelected, be addressed by the Government, which is, as the privileged and unaccountable, and the last word is the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, said, pretty much paralysed most important. I think we should be very wary of at the moment. But if we try to thwart the will of the trying to stop Brexit—which, I have just heard from people, which I think underlies the Motion, we will be the shouts of “hear, hear”, many people wish to do. very, very ill-advised. Regarding no deal, I sit on one of the EU sub- committees and we have heard about many of the 5.12 pm preparations. Indeed, my noble friend Lord Bridges Baroness Randerson (LD): My Lords, I shall try to referred to the number of SIs that have been done and concentrate on some factual points rather than opinions. so on. In some places we are ready to leave; I accept In preparation for this debate, I looked back at previous that entirely. Let us take transport. A couple of years Brexit debates. What struck me was how the situation ago we were told that aeroplanes would not be able to and our expectations have deteriorated in the past fly across the Channel and land because it would all be year or so. I was also struck by the airy promises and hell. I think everybody has realised that that is not assurances I received from a succession of Ministers true. which are now manifestly unachievable. We have been We heard other things about how we will be queueing through the phase where no deal was unthinkable, all the way from Dover to Lincolnshire. Nobody really through that of accepting that it was a possibility for thinks that and nobody really thought it at the time. A which preparation was important, and are now in the few hours ago, somebody said to me—I hasten to add phase where it is the preferred choice of the majority in jest—that he was going to fatten up to prepare for a of Conservative Party members and is therefore being Brexit winter. We hear about that as well: there will positively promoted by leadership candidates. not be any food, there will not be any medicine—or I start by talking about transport. Our whole economy whatever. rests on the shoulders of our transport industry.Looking But this Motion is to my way of thinking a ploy. at the industry, it is obvious how complex the process Whether one likes it or not—I do not believe that of addressing the costs of no deal would be. Let us referendums are a good idea—17.4 million people start with the cost to government in preparation. voted to leave. They did not say, “I will vote to leave There have been more than 60 transport-related SIs, just as long as we get a good deal”. We might not agree which will have involved thousands of hours of with the result, but they voted to leave. That was the preparation. There will be a whole new wave of them, decision, and the public believed that their decision because quite a few refer to the original 29 March date would be accepted because, for instance as Keir Starmer and will therefore now have to be revised. Many of our said: agreements with the EU on transport are limited to extending the current system for a small number of “We all have to accept and respect the referendum outcome. I campaigned to stay in the EU, and I would have expected the months. Those months were specified—sometimes it result to be honoured if we had won it”. was September; occasionally the end of the year—so Or let us take Vince Cable, who said: all that will have to be looked at again. “The public have voted and it is seriously disrespectful and Then there is the money spent in preparation for no politically utterly counter-productive to say, ‘Sorry guys, you’ve deal. The most commonly cited of those preparations, got it wrong. We’re going to try again’”. of course, are the ferry-less ferry services. Initially 1469 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[LORDS] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1470

[BARONESS RANDERSON] Baroness Randerson: I will not go into the details of £100 million was allocated for assisting ferry companies— the conversation. including the one with no ships—to provide additional I briefly mention Northern Ireland, where the costs ferry services. Because of fundamental errors in the will be specifically heavy because of the land border. way the contract was written, it has ended up with the Translink buses go backwards and forwards across Department for Transport having to pay many tens of that border every day, taking people to work, education, millions of pounds of compensation to a fourth ferry health facilities and so on. It will have a hugely disjointing company and to Eurotunnel. Because the other contracts impact on the economies of both countries. specified 29 March, they too had to be scrapped and Finally, as someone from Cardiff, I remind the the ferry companies compensated for not getting the House of the 57,000 Welsh farmers who, under a business, and it is now starting all over again. no-deal scenario, would see an immediate application There are ongoing preparations to avoid massive of tariff and non-tariff barriers to our exports to the lorry queues into Dover. You can see the impact of EU. That would mean exporters of Welsh sheepmeat Operation Brock on the M20. The initial costs were facing 40% to 50% tariffs. There would be so much given as £7 million, but it must be a great deal more damage to our economies that the costs are almost than that because it is a permanent separation of lanes impossible to contemplate. to create a lorry park—with, of course, an impact on local businesses because of delays and accidents that 5.21 pm have occurred there. In fact, the whole Kent economy Viscount Hailsham (Con): My Lords, my contribution is impacted by this. Think, too, about the cost to to this debate will be brief, partly because I have HMRC of 300 million additional customs declarations already expressed my views on many occasions, and in per year for our ports. part because, if I speak at any length, my anger, shame Then there are the costs to industry; many will and distress at what my party is doing to this country admit that their preparations cost millions of pounds. and to itself will become too apparent. All I can say in The Government’s estimate is that there will be an Mr Johnson’s favour is that his policies are somewhat 87% reduction in cross-channel trade for three to six less destructive than those advocated by Mr Corbyn months after a no-deal Brexit. Think about the impact and his immediate circle. I recognise that that is a of that on Eurotunnel and the freight and ferry operations. lukewarm endorsement. Some 16,000 lorries per day go through Dover to I support the Motion. Indeed, I cannot see any Calais. The impact of the queues for that number of rational reason for opposing it, certainly not the procedural lorries is considerable. At the moment you simply need reasons that I suspect the Minister will advance, nor an EU operator’s licence to transport goods to Europe. even the sophisticated arguments of my noble friend No deal could well lead to hauliers having to rely on a Lord Bridges, with whom I normally agree, or the less system of permits, of which our quota is 4,000. There sophisticated arguments advanced by my noble friend are 38,000 freight operators and 4,000 permits; think Lord Robathan. No-deal Brexit is not yet government about the impact on our industry. Clearly, many small policy, so the Motion reflects—indeed, underpins— operators will go out of business. government strategy. The Motion provides for a Joint I turn briefly to aviation, which is worth £52 billion Committee of both Houses, long called for by my per year to our economy.Fifty-four per cent of scheduled neighbour and noble friend Lord Cormack. It implies flights go to the EU. Some operators are already the taking and consideration of external and independent moving a chunk of their business abroad, with costs to evidence,doubtless to address the very questions identified our economy, to qualify for cabotage rights in future. by the noble Lords, Lord Anderson and Lord Paddick. There have been agreements between the EU and the That is highly desirable. UK, but they are not written in a way that would A report from such a source would ensure that, at a prevent them being swept away in the event of a no-deal critical moment—one certain to arise—the public would Brexit. Going through an airport at the moment, it be better informed about the consequences of a takes 25 seconds for a British passport and 90 seconds no-deal Brexit, which is precisely what my noble friend for a third-country passport to be inspected by EU Lord Bridges called for, and I wholly agree. Surely, the border forces. If you multiply that up, the impact of existence of a better-informed public is a necessary the queues on airports means vast costs to our economy. condition to taking back control. Incidentally, this The automotive industry is already suffering badly. Joint Committee could examine what I fear is the The tide of Japanese investment is already flowing somewhat optimistic analysis of my noble friend out; it came here only because we were in the EU. Job Lord Howell of Guildford. I normally agree with him, losses have been announced for Swindon, Sunderland but I should like to know what external experts have to and Bridgend, but remember that 160,000 people are say about it. employed in the supply chain as well—those are the To move away from the somewhat narrow terms of hidden jobs. There are also costs to us as individuals. the Motion, I conclude with the following observations. The noble Lord, Lord Robathan, once told me that he I regard the whole policy of Brexit as an extraordinary could not remember the international driving permit act of national self-harm—political, economic, cultural ever having existed, but people are buying those permits and diplomatic—and one that will threaten the very at the moment. unity of the United Kingdom, so eloquently spoken to by the noble Lord, Lord Reid. It is entirely unsupported by plausible assumptions or credible evidence. It is Lord Robathan: How can I ever forget? I still have being driven by obsessions of a largely absurd and my international driving permit from about 1970. harmful kind. 1471 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[3 JULY 2019] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1472

I do not accept that the referendum of 2016 provides second referendum would be even more bitterly divisive; any democratic authority for crashing out without a nor would it resolve the impasse. Whether it turned deal. In 2016, the electorate was assured that Brexit out that leave or remain had more votes, the majority would be a smooth, orderly process providing for would be narrow, leaving us with the same problem of seamless trade. That is not what will happen if a consent and reconciliation as we have now. no-deal Brexit occurs. As the noble Lord, Lord Kerr, Meanwhile, during the many months it would take made wholly plain in a masterly analysis, now that the to legislate and then organise and hold the referendum, relevant facts are so much clearer, there would be the economy would continue to suffer. Uncertainty is nothing undemocratic about a further referendum. the great enemy of markets and investment. The Governor Indeed, such a referendum is now probably a necessary of the Bank of England spoke yesterday of the drag precondition to the revocation of Article 50, which is from Brexit uncertainties intensifying. Our political what I think we should now do. There is evidence from paralysis has caused business paralysis. The latest the polls of a shift in public opinion. Moreover, after PMI and ONS figures highlight the malaise. Do we three years, a new and large cohort of young voters is want to extend from three to four years this vacuum in now enfranchised, and it is surely right that their views which little or nothing is done to address our on their future should be taken into account. uncompetitive productivity, in which businesses hoard Finally, any suggestion that Parliament should be cash, stockpile goods and defer investment decisions, prorogued to prevent elected Members of Parliament and in which the number of people doing precarious challenging or overruling the decisions of Ministers and poorly paid jobs has soared, as has the number of would be a constitutional outrage. Such a policy must people resorting to food banks? A second referendum be resisted by every possible proper means, including, is not in the interests of the poor and disadvantaged. if necessary, a Motion of no confidence. While to Alternatively, we might have a general election. support such a Motion would certainly risk possible This seems more likely to happen by accident than disaster, it might avert certain disaster. Those who design, but there is a real possibility that an early bring forward or participate in a policy of prorogation general election could follow a vote of no confidence. for the purpose identified will bring lasting shame on If there were to be a general election, it would not take themselves and the party to which they belong. It the politics of Brexit into clear water. A general election would almost certainly lead to their political destruction would be about more than Brexit. Neither leave nor and it would subvert the basic principles on which remain could claim the outcome as vindication. The parliamentary government rests. I am going to vote fragmentation of identity and political support among for the Motion. the electorate means in any case that, under first past the post, an election is unlikely to deliver a Government 5.27 pm with a working majority. Lord Howarth of Newport (Lab): My Lords, the So what other options are we left with? Joint Committee that my noble friend proposes should Perhaps the new Prime Minister will be able, at the be clear-eyed in weighing up the costs and implications 11th hour, to pull a rabbit out of the hat and negotiate of no deal by comparison with other options. a new deal that is acceptable to Parliament. It is hard One option is still for us to leave under the terms of to foresee success in such an endeavour, but it must be the Prime Minister’s withdrawal deal. Donald Tusk right to try. In the circumstances of a serious new said yesterday that we should not expect the new negotiation, possibly the EU would agree to another leaders of the EU institutions to offer any other deal. extension, but that is far from certain, and postponement However, the withdrawal deal is deeply objectionable is not resolution. to both leavers and remainers. Leavers see it as Brexit If negotiation does not work, we are forced on to in name only; remainers think it a poor substitute for so-called no deal. As is now the legal default, we could full membership. simply leave on 31 October. This is what people of a Another option is to revoke Article 50, but the nervous disposition—and they are right to be nervous— House of Commons is not going to vote for that call crashing out. Legal uncertainty, a sudden alteration either, and rightly so. For Parliament to repudiate the of terms of trade and severance of contractual and decision of the British people at the 2016 referendum administrative processes would indeed be disruptive would be catastrophic for our democracy. The two and possibly very damaging in ways that even the main parties pledged themselves to respect the verdict committee my noble friend proposes could not altogether of that referendum. The esteem in which Parliament is foresee. No one can responsibly advocate this. If it is held has been deteriorating throughout our political what, through failure of negotiation and planning, we lifetimes, and Brexit has precipitated a crisis of confidence find ourselves having to deal with, no doubt as a in Parliament. The House of Commons has failed to country we will cope, as we have coped in other crises. resolve Brexit, and voter support for the two main Mitigations by the Treasury and the Bank, common-sense parties has never been lower. Here, as in much of the waivers of the rules and bold improvisations by Whitehall EU, we can see a more sinister politics emerging out of and business would limit transitional damage, but frustration with the main parties and parliamentary people would get hurt. government. There can, however, be a relatively benign version A third option is another referendum. That would of no deal. It is not too late to achieve a managed no be a cop-out by Parliament. As Mr Heath discovered deal. This is an option that the Bank envisaged in its at the February 1974 election, the people do not response to the Treasury Select Committee last autumn. expect their MPs to pass the buck back to them. A The Bank’s projection was that a managed no deal 1473 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[LORDS] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1474

[LORD HOWARTH OF NEWPORT] 5.35 pm would provide for future growth to be only 1.5% less Baroness Bull (CB): My Lords, since last we debated by 2023 than under the Prime Minister’s withdrawal EU withdrawal in this Chamber, “no deal”has changed agreement—no catastrophe, therefore. The Joint its meaning. It used to be a negotiating stance, but it Committee, once it has examined the evidence, might has become a test of virility, a metaphor for how consider that comparatively minor diminution of tough each candidate in the Conservative leadership prospective growth a price worth paying in these race promises to be in the face of any resistance to circumstances, in which there are compelling objections reopen the withdrawal agreement on the table. I am and obstacles to all other options. grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Smith of Basildon, It has been grossly irresponsible on the part of the for providing this opportunity to remind ourselves Chancellor, since the referendum, to have dragged his what no deal really means, not to the electoral prospects feet on preparing for no deal. Yesterday he repeated of prime ministerial hopefuls nor to the future of the his adamantine opposition to no deal, but whatever he Conservative Party, but to the people who live, and or others may have wished, no deal has always been a make a living, in the UK. possibility and there are no excuses for failing to make In any normal negotiations, no deal assumes the fullest preparations for that contingency. So much maintenance of the status quo but in this scenario it more could have been done to mitigate the risks of no means cutting loose from the frameworks that have deal and, of course, to strengthen our negotiating defined business as usual for many decades. We have position. As President Macron also said yesterday: heard in so many powerful speeches today the impact “If you fear no deal you are the hostage”. on many crucial areas. I want to speak briefly about I was appalled to read in the Guardian of 11 April that, the impact on one of the sectors I know best: the following the postponement of Brexit from 29 March, creative industries. Whitehall transferred 6,000 officials who were at last First, no deal would end the free movement of preparing for no deal back to other departmental talent on which the sector has built its success, without duties and stood down operational planning for no any replacement regime in place. This would leave deal. businesses with no immediate route to recruit—as Be that as it may, we still have four months before they do now—EU staff to plug the chronic domestic our scheduled departure date of 31 October, and a skills gaps that exist in at least 20 different creative great deal of useful preparation for a managed no deal occupations. Anyone offered a contract to work here can be made in that period to build on the reassuring would have to apply through the tier 2 visa system plans for no deal that have already been made on both currently in use for the rest of the world. However, this sides of the Channel in relation to transport, customs route is open only for jobs worth at least £30,000 a and so forth. year and many vital roles in the sector do not command a salary at that level. Some 30% of the creative workforce I know the EU believes it is politically necessary to is freelance, but there is currently no system that show—pour encourager les autres—that it must be allows small creative businesses to recruit vital freelance painful for a member state to leave the EU. But the skills from non-EU countries in a way that matches 27 and ourselves continue to profess friendship. Good their operating model—that is to say, on shoestring will, common sense and pragmatism can still, in the budgets and a project-by-project basis. interests of our EU trading partners and ourselves, Let us not forget that freedom of movement works make no deal manageable, with much potential damage in two directions, allowing UK citizens the chance to avoided. work in 27 other countries with their professional My understanding, supported by eminent legal and qualifications recognised and key regulatory issues academic authority and pace the noble Lord, Lord Kerr aligned. No deal would throw reciprocal social security of Kinlochard, is that under Article XXIV of the arrangements up in the air, adding new paperwork, GATT we can avoid new tariff barriers between ourselves costs and risks to working in a country beyond the one and the EU, precluding the need for a hard border in in which you have residency. the island of Ireland, if the EU makes a simple Secondly, businesses would face new administrative commitment in principle to start negotiations with us and financial burdens in moving sets, costumes, kit to achieve a free trade area. and equipment across borders. Drivers would need It is a moment to remember the old maxim: international licences, vehicles would require permits and goods would need a carnet. This might sound like “Keep calm and carry on”. just a bit more form-filling, but the Royal Shakespeare A Joint Committee may find that, sensibly conceived Company estimates that the additional expense would and with determined preparation, no deal can well be increase the cost of taking a show abroad by 10% to manageable and transitional turbulence can be minimised. 15%. Larger organisations might be able to sustain It may conclude that it would be the least unsatisfactory this but much of the sector is made up of small route to the resolution of Brexit. companies, many of which are reliant on a lucrative Which would be better for our country? To pursue European market that pays performance fees at four economic growth, regardless of other values, within times the UK rate. A combination of reduced income an ailing EU or to nerve ourselves to seize the great and increased costs will hit these companies hard. prize that Brexit offers of the recovery of national Thirdly and finally,no deal would mean an immediate self-government and the opportunity to renew our end to EU funding, including Creative Europe money, democracy and self-belief? which has contributed nearly £17 million a year to UK 1475 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[3 JULY 2019] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1476 cultural organisations and benefits one out of every demand to agree the terms of withdrawal separately three artists annually. This is the reality of no deal for before starting to negotiate the basis of our future the creative industries—a sector that contributes relationship. The separation of negotiations into two £101.5 billion a year in GVA, provides over 3 million parts played completely into the hands of the EU’s jobs across the creative economy and is responsible for negotiators. We had a very strong case for refusing to 11% of the UK’s total service exports. All those issues separate the negotiations in this way, as Article 50 are echoed, and even exacerbated, in the service sector clearly states that, as a whole—a sector that is particularly vulnerable to “the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement”, no deal because of the complex web of “behind the with the departing member state, border” rules and regulations that underpin trading across the EU. Services account for 80% of UK GDP “setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account and four out of every five jobs across the country. of the framework for its future relationship”. They are the goose that lays the golden eggs, yet in the As the noble Lord, Lord King of Lothbury, has Brexit story they are treated like Cinderella. said, Of course, we would adapt in the long term to “There are arguments for remaining in the EU and arguments whatever changes resulted from a new relationship for leaving. But there is no case whatever for giving up the benefits of remaining without obtaining the benefits of leaving”. with the EU.Businesses with large reserves and individuals with significant resources would probably ride out any I agree with him that it makes no sense to try to find a storm. However, without a transition period, smaller framework for our future relationship that effectively businesses and the people they employ would be at keeps us half in. Should your Lordships’ House agree risk, and expert opinion is that in a no-deal scenario with the proposal of the noble Baroness, Lady Smith, the economy as a whole would take a hit, impacting to appoint a Joint Committee, would it not be logical on tax revenues and the resources available to support for such a committee also to consider the costs and the most vulnerable in our society. implications for the United Kingdom of staying in the EU or of seeking a third extension to the Article 50 Frankly, it beggars belief that with everything we period? Many people are asking, “Why haven’t we left know—with all the warnings that the Government already?”, irrespective of whether they voted leave or themselves have pointed out—we are once again careering remain in 2016. The uncertainty created by our failure towards a cliff edge, as the Tory leadership contest to leave according to the expected schedule has resulted turns no deal into a measure of machismo. The 2016 in extra costs and uncertainties for business. campaign never mentioned this—quite the opposite, as we have already heard. Both Houses have rejected In 2018, our net contribution to the EU after rebate no deal, and the latest YouGov poll confirms that and after £4.3 billion of public sector receipts amounted there is no popular mandate either, with only 28% of to £8.9 billion. However, moves are afoot to abolish all the public favouring departure without a deal. Yet the rebates for the next EU multiannual financial framework likelihood of no deal increases day by day, as leadership for 2021-27. If this were to happen and if the UK, in hopefuls dice with stability and security in their efforts spite of the referendum vote, were to remain a member to win the votes of the 0.3% of the population who of the EU, our contributions, net of public sector will choose our next Prime Minister. receipts, would be likely to be in excess of £13 billion Therefore, I too support the Motion in the name of or some £250 million a week. the noble Baroness, Lady Smith of Basildon. It has It is a fact that small companies have found it become abundantly clear, over the last three years, increasingly expensive to comply with all the EU that Brexit splits opinions in ways that cut across regulation that has been transposed into domestic law conventional party lines. Avoiding no deal seems to be over the last few years. It is true that much of this has the only thing on which there has been consistent been initiated by the UK, but where we have opposed alignment, in both Houses and across political divides. elements of EU regulation, we have always been overruled, If we start by working together on an issue on which especially with the extension of qualified majority most of us are able to agree, who knows what might be voting in recent years. In the financial sector, many possible? Perhaps the same group might then move on smaller asset management companies have been forced to tackle the really big question: where do we go from to merge or incorporate elsewhere to avoid AIFMD or here? MiFID II. The proposed Joint Committee should look at the loss of revenue and jobs caused by cumbersome and expensive EU regulation and at the cost of further 5.42 pm delaying the date when we can begin, carefully and Viscount Trenchard (Con): My Lords, I respect the selectively, to abolish or change regulations which opinion of all noble Lords who have spoken so far in damage our markets and our industry. this debate but, holding a different opinion from the Another benefit of leaving with a better deal or, in majority in this House, I would like to put forward extremis, without a deal, is that we would no longer be some other points. bound by chapter 4 of part 5 of the draft withdrawal I believe that the Government were right to try to agreement, which deals with the European Investment negotiate a sensible withdrawal agreement that would Bank. It seems extraordinary that we have agreed to allow us to recover our freedom as a global trading accept only the return of our paid-in subscribed capital, nation with an independent trade policy yet continue amounting to some ¤3.5 billion. It is logical that we to trade as smoothly and easily as possible with the should also be entitled to receive our 16.1% share of EU.I absolutely cannot understand whythe Government’s the retained earnings. Adding this amount, the net negotiators believed that they had to accept the EU’s tangible assets attributable to our stake amount to 1477 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[LORDS] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1478

[VISCOUNT TRENCHARD] 5.51 pm ¤11.1 billion, more than three times what we have Lord Adonis (Lab): My Lords, the bad news is that agreed to accept. Worse, the repayment of our paid-in Boris Johnson says he is contemplating no deal; the capital is to take place over 12 years, until December good news is that he does not really believe it. He 2030, without payment of any dividends or interest. knows that it would be disastrous and that Parliament Furthermore, there has already been a marked decline will not agree to it. More to the point, he does not in the funding of UK projects since the referendum, really believe in Brexit itself. He was against Brexit; from ¤7 billion in 2016 to less than ¤1 billion in 2018. then he was for it. He was against Mrs May’s deal; To cap it all, the UK is to remain liable for its 16.1% then he was for it. Anyone who knows Boris Johnson share of the uncalled but committed capital in respect knows that the only thing Boris Johnson believes in is of the EIB’sfinancial operations at the time of withdrawal. Boris Johnson. He is the Roman emperor for whom That could amount to a call of up to a further policy is bread and circuses for the little people. ¤35.7 billion. As a member of the EU Financial Affairs Sub-Committee—although the report was completed If remaining emperor means chucking Brexit, prior to my appointment—I trust that your Lordships’ Mr Johnson will do so at the drop of a hat. We even House will have an opportunity to debate our report, know the words he will use when he does so, because published on 31 January, before the House rises for the he has told us. Just before he came out for Brexit, he Summer Recess. said that he was in two minds and wrote an article setting out the opposite case. Three years later, that Lastly, I suggest that the proposed Joint Committee article has stood the test of time. I will read it your should also look at the potential costs to the UK of a Lordships: major eurozone failure, such as envisaged in the recent “Think of the future. Think of the desire of your children and worrying report by Bob Lyddon for Global Britain. your grandchildren to live and work in other European countries; Seven member states have debt to GDP ratios in to sell things there, to make friends and perhaps to find partners excess of 90%, making it most unlikely that they can there. … Almost everyone expects there to be some sort of comply with the 60% limit set by the EU fiscal stability economic shock as a result of a Brexit. How big would it be? ... treaty by 2030. Italy’s is the highest, at 132%, and it is And how can we know? And then there is the worry about not politically acceptable for the Italian Government Scotland, and the possibility that an English-only ‘leave’ vote even to try to comply. It is very likely that investors could lead to the break-up of the union”. will recognise that the recovery and stability of the Clearly,Mr Johnson had read my noble friend Lord Reid’s eurozone system is an illusion, concealing as much as speech. He continued: ¤1 trillion of overvaluation of assets in the euro system. “There is the Putin factor: we don’t want to do anything to A new eurozone crisis could well be triggered as early encourage more shirtless swaggering from the Russian leader … as the end of next year, for example, if Moody’s were And then there is the whole geostrategic anxiety. Britain is a great nation, a global force for good. It is surely a boon for the world to downgrade Italy’s credit rating by one notch from and for Europe that she should be intimately engaged in the EU. its current level of Baa3. In that event, the ECB might This is a market on our doorstep, ready for further exploitation be compelled to recapitalise the euro system for up to by British firms: the membership fee seems rather small for all this amount and there are only six eurozone member that access. Why are we so determined to turn our back on it?” states whose central banks are capable of contributing My Lords, why indeed? to a reset. It is inevitable that, again, the non-eurozone countries would be called upon to contribute, of which 5.53 pm there are only three solvent candidates. Of these, only the Bank of England is sizeable and, based on its Lord Taverne (LD): My Lords, I hope that one of “capital key” of 13.7%, could be called upon to make the costs that the committee will consider in its a contribution to the order of ¤230 billion. If our deliberations is the cost of uncertainty. Industry longs finances remain accessible to the EU, we will not be for certainty and there is a widespread, strange view able to escape the risk of an enormous hit of this sort among many industrialists that leaving on 31 October of size unless we leave with a better deal or, if necessary, at least brings certainty. They could not be more no deal. wrong. As the Governor of the Bank of England told the Commons Treasury Committee, a no-deal Brexit is, It is not my preferred option that we should leave … with no deal, but in some respects the costs and risks “the worst way to resolve uncertainty”. of leaving under the withdrawal agreement are arguably It is obvious why. By definition, a no-deal Brexit much higher. We must be prepared to leave with no means that we will not have a trade deal when we deal to persuade our EU interlocutors that they should leave,after which it will take long and difficult negotiations put economic common sense above their political before we know what the most important part of our interests and agree to negotiate a fair deal, which will future relations with the EU will be. And let us please protect trade, jobs and the economies of both the UK note: in such negotiations we will no longer be able to and the EU 27. I welcome the publication last week, use what Brexiters always argue is a vital bargaining by the alternative arrangements commission of Prosperity ploy—the threat of walking away—because we will be UK, of an interim report which offers several clear out, and in a very weak bargaining position. ways of solving the Irish border problem. I believe We cannot always trust Boris Johnson’s words, as that, with good will on both sides, the EU’s negotiators the noble Lord, Lord Adonis, has pointed out, but will recognise that they can, and must, work hard to here is nevertheless a policy that would be very difficult agree a new deal that is equitable and sensible, and to abandon. Boris Johnson says that he will not pay which will provide the basis for a sustainable, positive, our divorce bill, for debts we legally owe, until we have long-term relationship between the UK and the EU. a deal. Mr Hunt has made a rather curious suggestion 1479 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[3 JULY 2019] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1480 that he may withhold part of the divorce payment. constituents, most often those who ran businesses Leaving aside the devastating consequences of telling with perishable goods. They would phone up and say the world that Britain is now a country that does not that their consignment was stuck at a frontier or a pay its debts, the EU will almost certainly sue us and customs post, and what could I do to move things refuse to negotiate until we have paid. Legal proceedings, along? What could I do? We argued that instead of which we would almost certainly lose, will drag out for having perhaps 100 pages of customs form, we would many months, probably years—so much for the early have 100 boxes. I am sure the noble Lord, Lord Kinnock, end of uncertainty. will remember this only too well. We reduced the form It is time industry faced reality and recognised that to one page with about 120 boxes on it; if one box was there is no upside to a no-deal Brexit. As for most of not filled completely correctly, that consignment was the Conservative Party, they are now rushing like not going anywhere. Whatever you call it, I look on lemmings towards a no-deal Brexit, including many that as a form of protectionism, and that is exactly who have acknowledged that no deal would be a where we shall be if we fall into a no-deal scenario. catastrophe. It brings to mind, as I wrote in a letter My question to both Front Benches—to the noble published in the Guardian last week, the old Greek Baroness, Lady Smith, and particularly to the Minister, saying: is: were this Motion to pass today, what impact and “Whom the Gods would destroy they first make mad”. legal effect would it have? What is the legal basis for the Motion before us? We all understand that it could 5.57 pm be amendable in the other place, but what we really Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con): My Lords, I need is to prevent no deal happening and to ensure congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Smith, on securing that we have a successful deal concluded. this debate. When considering how to contribute, I I fall into the pro-European camp. I am proud to be thought there were two possible approaches to take. pro-European. I am half Danish and have studied in One, as a number of noble Lords have done, is to Denmark. I commit the sin of speaking a number of itemise all the aspects of no deal and how that would European languages, and long may the next generation impact on businesses, farms and consumers, and on coming through be able to do the same. What we need the pound and industry generally. The other approach is a legislative text to prevent the UK falling out of would be to itemise all the reports scrutinising Europe, the EU. particularly from the EU Committee and its seven Another hat that I wear is that I am an honorary sub-committees. I do not propose to adopt either president of the UK Warehousing Association. I know approach. many noble Lords will be very envious; it is a fine The danger of today’s debate, it appears to me, is position to have, and we had a splendid lunch last that this is yet another occasion when we as week. That organisation is worried witless, and it is the parliamentarians are speaking to ourselves. The missing very essence of those businesses whose business is link in all this—it was the missing link in the referendum just-in-time logistics. What can we tell it will be the campaign and continues to be so in this debate and case after 31 October? externally—is the voice of business.Where is it? Although These are very real situations. A number of examples there are notable exceptions, such as the food and have been given, and the most shocking to me is that drink industry, with which I am heavily involved, large businesses are probably in a good state of when we ask businesses to tell us what the bottom line preparedness but small and medium-sized businesses would be, so that we can place on record the damage it are woefully underprepared and probably do not and would do to this country, the industry is reluctant to will not have the resources in place to prepare. do so. They pray in aid their AGM, and what the impact on their share price and shareholders would be. My question to the outside world is: where is the voice of business? Where are all those other businesses, I shall share with noble Lords where I believe we such as the chemical and pharmaceutical industries will be in the event of no deal. I was taken by the wise and food and drink businesses, that are prepared to words of the noble Lord, Lord Kerr, who actively set stand up and be counted? If we do not hear from the out where he thinks we will be. He should know what voice of business in the few weeks that remain before he is talking about because he advised many of us as we potentially crash out without a deal, the public will Ministers or, in my case, as an MEP. We then heard not be convinced. Regrettably, while I welcome this from the noble Lord, Lord Howarth, who took an debate, and any debate where we can discuss the issues entirely different view and seemed to take issue with before us, I shall not support the Motion because what what the noble Lord, Lord Kerr, concluded. Both we really need is a legislative text on which both Houses have passed a raft of statutory instruments in parties can vote to prevent the awful event of a no-deal preparation for no deal. No doubt, as rehearsed here, scenario taking place on 31 October. no deal would have a huge impact on the level of the pound and on businesses and industry. 6.03 pm I am also mindful of the situation that we found prior to the single market and the customs union Lord Dykes (CB): My Lords, I am disappointed coming into effect. Thirty years ago this week I was that the noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh of Pickering, elected for the first time to the European Parliament. I is not going to support the Motion. It is always a remember vividly, during those first three years between pleasure to follow her. As I think she implied, she is 1989 and 1992, that on a small number of occasions—they probably the only Member of Parliament in either did not perhaps occur every week but they were significant House to speak Danish. It would therefore be important and memorable—I had phone calls from distraught to register that point. 1481 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[LORDS] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1482

[LORD DYKES] Perhaps the most reckless and awful behaviour by The words of the noble Viscount, Lord Trenchard, these bandit politicians was to reduce the crucial were very interesting. When he talked about the possibility importance of the Good Friday agreement and the of a euro crisis, I mused that the euro is now, in value of our international presence among our 27 ever- international banking payment transaction terms sovereign fellow member states, which themselves are throughout the world, the strongest currency in the not worried about losing sovereignty, as they gain world; it is three points behind the US federal dollar international and collective sovereignty as well as and likely to overtake the US dollar fairly soon, although individual sovereignty by being strong, united members no one knows exactly when. With Christine Lagarde of the EU. Why can we not do the same? I was very to be the new president of the European Central struck by the words of one of the D-day veterans at a Bank, we will see how strong the euro is in comparison recent ceremony. A very wise 94 year-old, Mr Eric with the sad reality of the pound sterling. Since the Chardin, was interviewed by the BBC and asserted end of the war, it has been devalued nine times, three that we have gone to so much trouble to collect the big times by government action and six in the marketplace. European nations together that, “To break it all up The comparison is too painful to go on further about. now would be a crying shame”. Turning to another speech, I thank the noble Lord, On Northern Ireland and Ireland, it is painful for Lord Adonis, for his fascinating speech, with which I me to remind the House that yesterday, on 2 July, with agreed entirely—and he said it all through the words John Humphrys on BBC Radio 4 in the morning, the of Boris Johnson. Because it was so good, I forgive spokesman for the DUP in the other place, Sammy him his temporary lapse when he said he was in favour Wilson MP, said words close to this: “The Irish will of a soft Brexit after all to be a candidate in the always push you around if you let them, but if you European parliamentary elections, which happened stand up to them they will co-operate”. How can an recently, as we know. I am sorry that he did not get in, official spokesman with a portfolio say such a thing in although it may have been for that reason. a broadcast to, I suppose, 7 million listeners? These things are really dire now.The no-deal crash-out It is important to support the Motion, and I thank effects would be catastrophic for the highly technical the Leader of the Opposition for putting it forward just-in-time inter-trading of manufacturing and for very cogently and clearly. It is essential that we do this services companies helping the manufacturers and and persuade our colleagues in the Commons to their suppliers, as well as a whole host of other small co-operate and work with us. The emergency atmosphere companies. Also, if we crashed out with no deal, the ill will now accelerate enormously and rapidly. I like the will in the European Union would be massive, and the phrase “costs and implications” in the Motion because, hatred among the 27 members for the damage we had as we know, both are enormous, damaging and done to them and to ourselves would last for years. devastating. The public would be more and more shocked and Like others, in future I will read the many books appalled by what was going on. It is scarifying that the written about this tragic period since the 2016 referendum only real alternative to a no-deal Brexit is a hard and the huge damage bestowed on the body politic, Brexit. People forget that. not only by former Prime Minister Cameron but by Turning briefly to Ireland, in the Irish Times yesterday, the following Prime Minister, Theresa May, after an Fintan O’Toole said, with some meaning: advisory-only referendum in which millions of people “Brexit is nothing. It was always a negative proposition. Most were not given the facts about all the pain and agony British leaders, even those who wanted to stay in, never created and the ruination of this country.The Bullingdon-isation for their people any positive vision of the European Union. It was of British politics, wreaked on an innocent public by spoken of grudgingly, and engaged with defensively. The remain the self-seeking Tory candidates to be Prime Minister, campaign in 2016 essentially presented staying in as the lesser of is ongoing. There is still no shame or contrition. As two evils: the EU is bad but leaving it would be even worse”. one newspaper recently remarked about Boris Johnson, What a sad position for this great country to have among his various qualities, reached. Now, no deal must be resisted, strongly. I am anticipating the outcome of all the discussions and “Mr Johnson is a vacuous and irresponsible dissembler whose jumping far ahead of today’s Motion, but at least it is Islamophobia is uttered with a wink and a smirk”. a starting point to rescue this country from total Theresa May having lost the so-called mandate after perdition. the 8 June election result, the notion that the Government can just go on with their bandit tactics is abhorrent to more and more people. The Government have admitted 6.11 pm several times that Labour is bound to win an election, Lord Saatchi (Con): My Lords, some noble Lords so we must avoid one. Presumably, as others have said, say that they cannot support this Motion because it the phoney deal with the DUP has expired, at least for goes too far in promoting a House of Lords role in all decent observers, and is too painful to contemplate Brexit. I do not support it for the opposite reason: it further. does not go far enough. Meanwhile we have to thank Mr Speaker, John Your Lordships’ House has recently been the victim Bercow, in the other place, for many things over the of a snub, a serious breach of etiquette. People can get years, including his sturdy defence of the rights of the quite touchy about things like that. In the case of House of Commons and of individual Members, but Brexit, we have already had one failure of etiquette. particularly for flatly ruling out the misuse of Prorogation Our own Prime Minister was told to go to Brussels for crude party advantage. and deal with the staff: EU officials and civil servants, 1483 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[3 JULY 2019] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1484 well below her pay grade. That is the equivalent of the do to make any difference”or,“It’s not my responsibility. American President coming to Buckingham Palace to My hands are clean”. The result of this sorry tale of see the Queen and being sent to the Foreign Office to broken promises and failure to deliver on time is meet the Permanent Secretary. Of course, the US general cynicism and disillusionment, so well captured Government would never allow that to happen to their by my noble friend Lord Cormack. We the people are leader, but we did. That is probably why the negotiations left standing like the passengers at Heathrow, forlornly failed. Now this EU debacle has brought us face to looking up at that familiar notice board: “Delayed, face with another example of poor etiquette, and this delayed, delayed, cancelled, cancelled, cancelled”. time much closer to home: between your Lordships’ How can your Lordships’ House help? We certainly House and another place, down the corridor. have the expertise. Look at the distinguished members Like all humble people, we in your Lordships’ of our Select Committee and sub-committees on Europe, House do not mind looking up to our superiors, as and the speakers’ lists in all our EU debates, including long as we are not taken advantage of or taken for this one. Look around the Chamber, see all the Cabinet granted. However, as far as we are concerned, we have Secretaries, the distinguished Private Secretaries to the been the dog that did not bark in the night; not even a Prime Minister, the Political Secretaries, the heads of growl. While another place has had meaningful votes the No. 10 Policy Unit, the No. 10 Chiefs of Staff: a on the historic choices about our national future, we fine group. have been told to be satisfied with only take-note We all need a bucket of ice-cold water thrown over Motions. In fact, we agreed to that. our fantasies every now and again. But we, the Members Under Section 13(1)(b) of the European Union of your Lordships’ House, have been subjected to the (Withdrawal) Act, which many noble Lords know political equivalent of waterboarding, a torture that more about than I do, the withdrawal agreement cannot leaves you weak and angry. We feel powerless. They be ratified unless the House of Commons has given its tell us that it is not all bad and that there is nothing we approval. Apparently, this is what is meant by the can do about it anyway. They say that no matter how House of Commons having a meaningful vote. The hard we try, it is not going to result in anything. They House of Lords does not have a corresponding meaningful are a wet blanket that smothers us. I urge all my noble vote to approve the withdrawal agreement and the friends and all Members of your Lordships’ House on framework for the future relationship. However, Section all Benches to assert ourselves. There is no cause for 13(1)(d) provides that the withdrawal agreement can pride in what has happened in Britain in the last few be ratified only if an Act of Parliament has been years. There is no cause for self-satisfaction, but there passed which contains provisions for the implementation is cause for hope and faith in our House. In our time, of the withdrawal agreement in domestic law. Yet we this House has lived with the moments of great crisis. had no role in the failed EU talks. No Member of your Our lives have been marked with debates about great Lordships’ House was a key part of the team during issues, issues of war and peace, issues of prosperity this painful process which brought down the Prime and depression. This is not about trade deals, tariffs, Minister. We constituted one of 28 people around the membership fees, et cetera. It is about the values, the Cabinet table. That is 3.6% of the decision-making, is purposes and the meanings of our great nation, our it not? dignity, our good name and our sacred honour. There is no EU problem. There is no Irish problem. There is It has been said that we signed away our rights to no Scottish problem. There is only a British problem. have a view on Brexit, but that is not the case. We have We are met here today not as Conservative or Labour, the power, as confirmed by our Library, which says Liberal Democrat or Cross-Bench—or leave or remain— that the usual powers of the House of Lords will apply but as British people, to solve that problem. That is to the passage of any Act of Parliament to do with our purpose. Brexit. That is my point. Section 13 of the withdrawal Act does not change the usual powers of the House of Many of the issues of Europe are very complex and Lords over passing primary and secondary legislation. most difficult, but about this there should be no argument: we cannot, we ought not and we must not wait any I ask your Lordships to consider the historic context longer before insisting on involving your Lordships’ of this Motion. Many noble Lords will remember the House in Brexit. We have already waited long enough, passage of the House of Lords Act. My noble friends and the time for waiting is gone, so I ask you to join and I were then sitting on the Opposition Benches. We me to make this happen. I do not make that request were told that we should not “die in the ditch” to lightly for, from where I sit, I recognise that outside preserve the hereditary Peers. After they had gone, the Westminster is the outraged conscience of a nation, then Leader of the House told us that your Lordships’ the grave concern of many nations, and the harsh House would be more democratic, more legitimate, judgment of history on our acts. more authoritative. That was what was promised to us during the passage of the House of Lords Act, but it We need a North Star, a guiding light, and your never happened. Now it is said that if we step out of Lordships’ House can help to provide it. Yet we are line, they will set the Parliament Act on us, or worse, continuously told to show “humility”. What is in that abolish us altogether, so the House of Commons was word? You will hear it said that we must display left to its own devices, but none of that will help us on modesty, restraint and reserve—admirable qualities the day of judgment. The British public say that this all. That, however,is not what is meant by humility—not has been “a complete mess” and “a total shambles”. at all. I looked it up. It has other meanings: obedience, We in your Lordships’ House cannot say, “It’s not my self-abasement, subjection, submissiveness, timidity and fault”, “I’m off the hook, there was nothing we could inferiority complex. 1485 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[LORDS] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1486

[LORD SAATCHI] agreement. Insisting on 31 October as the immovable I am very proud of our House and what it can do. departure date will almost certainly mean a no-deal As our brilliant Library confirms, we are at a moment departure. of maximum power for your Lordships’ House. This In addition to the extreme economic consequences Motion has much merit but it does not go far enough. of a no-deal departure we must be aware of the very Wemust not show arrogance, egoism or self- importance. serious additional strain on the union of the United Nor will we. Let us, however, at least show boldness, Kingdom. No unionist of any party should ignore confidence and pride, so that we can all hear, loud and this point. I am sorry that the noble Lord, Lord Reid, clear, the Clerk’s immortal words in the House of is no longer in his place—his excellent speech should Commons: “Message from the House of Lords”. be required reading for both candidates for the leadership of the Conservative Party. I will repeat something I have said before. With great sadness I accept that we are leaving. It must, 6.21 pm however, be orderly and with a transition period. The Motion tabled by the noble Baroness represents, if The Duke of Wellington (Con): My Lords, as the other place accepts it, a further attempt to always I declare my European interests as detailed in demonstrate to the ultras in Parliament, and to the the register. wider public, the impossibility of leaving without a We have had some very good speeches from this deal. I very much hope that the Motion will be side of the House, but I am afraid that I have reached accepted—but, if formed, the Joint Committee will a different conclusion: I support the Motion in the have to work over the summer to produce a report name of the noble Baroness, Lady Smith of Basildon. before it is too late. In fact, it would have been desirable to have a Joint The chances of a no-deal Brexit are increasing day Committee earlier in this process. At this point it may by day during this leadership contest, to the detriment be a bit late, and any report may no longer have much of the public interest. Let us as a House at least try to effect, but I completely agree that it is worth at least put the case again for an orderly exit in the national trying. interest. This Motion has support from many sides of this House—correctly so, because it is a matter not of 6.26 pm party interest but of national interest. I am surprised every day that the ultras continue to deny the risks to Lord Hannay of Chiswick (CB): My Lords, it is this country and its economy of leaving the European surely rather astonishing that, three years after the Union without a withdrawal agreement. Indeed, the 2016 referendum, two years after we began to negotiate ultra ultras even suggest that they would prefer to our exit, and having twice flirted with withdrawing leave without a deal. They propose that the UK and without a deal, we should need to call for an inquiry the EU should trade on a tariff-free basis under into the costs and implications of the course of Article 24 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and action that is on the Order Paper—and which I whole- Trade. We have already heard from the noble Lord, heartedly support. I note that several of those who Lord Kerr, about the difficulties of doing that, and said that they cannot support it are only doing so those who propose it always forget to acknowledge because they think that it does not go far enough that it requires the agreement of the EU. quickly enough. So there is not much opposition to it. Most thoughtful professionals and experts advise—I That is right, because one is bound to ask whether the do not wish to use journalistic hyperbole but it is Prime Minister knew, before she asserted with such generally accepted—that leaving without a deal is at confidence—and continually repeated—that no deal best very high risk and at worst would have dire was better than a bad deal, what the costs and implications consequences. Surely no responsible Minister of the were. Crown could knowingly endanger this nation’swell-being Perhaps she did know by last November, when she by contemplating a no-deal Brexit. The mood of both turned her policy through 180 degrees and started to Houses of Parliament is to prohibit such an outcome. negotiate on the basis that any deal was better than A Government who head in that direction are defying no deal. Anyway, now we are where we are, and it is the will of Parliament. Nevertheless, both candidates right that Parliament and the wider public should standing for leader of the Conservative Party appear be told, through this inquiry, what the costs and to be bidding against each other to win a no-deal implications might be. After all, both aspiring Prime Brexit. I cannot believe that any Prime Minister, Ministers are prepared to contemplate leaving particularly a Conservative one, would even consider without a deal, so it is surely time to shine a light on proroguing Parliament until November to eliminate what the consequences will be. parliamentary opposition—yet at least one candidate I will focus today on the trade pacts, which is a has not ruled it out. field in which I have some experience, having been In any event, a serious risk remains that unless we involved in the GATT Article 24 negotiations when seek a further extension, to beyond 31 October, there we joined the European Communities in 1973. What will simply not be enough time for any renegotiation should we expect? Our trade with the EU is 44% of and the consequential legislative procedures. Neither our exports. There are no surprises there, because last of the candidates to be Prime Minister has December the Commission stated, as part of the acknowledged this lack of time. We still need a preparations for a no-deal exit that they were transition period and for that we need a withdrawal undertaking with the 27 member states, that if the 1487 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[3 JULY 2019] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1488 withdrawal agreement was not ratified, all relevant 6.33 pm EU legislation on imported and exported goods Viscount Waverley (CB): My Lords, I beg the would apply as of the withdrawal date, as would the indulgence of the House for a minute. A blindfolded rules on indirect taxation—value added tax. So there march to the cliff edge is unpatriotic, irresponsible is not much comfort for anyone in this country who and would for ever levy the charge of our not having exports cars and will face a 10% tariff, for the carried out our duty. The staunchest of proponents, Shropshire sheep farmer whom Jeremy Hunt on whichever side of the argument they lie, could apparently met on his peregrinations and who will surely not deny that our responsibility is to deliver face a 40% levy, or for exporters of fish and shellfish open-eyed knowledge. It is beholden on us as —the list goes on. parliamentarians to do our duty beholden to the only That will apply straightaway on the day we leave. governing force, that of the just cause of patriotism How about the service industries, which make up 80% and pragmatism. We in this Parliament must be in of our economy, as my noble friend Lady Bull pointed pursuance of the blindingly obvious, or pack our out—legal, insurance, finance, creative industries and bags, go home or redefine a Brussels relationship. I so on—which have made so much of their position end with just one question. Should a committee within the single market? Those benefits that they determine by the end of September that no deal is a derived from the single market will simply disappear non-starter, what mechanism will exist in Parliament overnight; they will not be there. Is there any magic to reverse the default position of leaving without a wheeze to escape from this trap, as the noble Lord, deal by the 31 October deadline—or is the possible Lord Lilley, continually suggests to us that there is by proroguing of Parliament, as we are led to believe, an waving some magic wand which he seems to have increasing reality? identified in Article 24 of the GATT? There is no chance of that whatever, because in order even to get 6.34 pm to first base on that you need the agreement of the European Union—and the European Union will not Baroness Smith of Newnham (LD): My Lords, this agree to that, because it involves driving a coach and has been an extraordinary debate. Three years after horses through the most favoured nation provisions of the vote to leave the European Union, it is in many the GATT, which, funnily enough, this country as well ways extraordinary that we are still debating what the as the European Union is desperately trying to save consequences of a no-deal Brexit could be or considering from the depredations of President Trump. The EU the need to set up a committee to look at them. will not do it, in particular because, if it went down As the noble Duke, the Duke of Wellington, suggested, that road and it did not work, it would lay itself open this debate is arguably rather too late. One might think to massive retaliation by the United States. So do not that it should have happened in July 2016 rather than expect it. July 2019. During debates on the EU referendum Bill in 2015, one or two of us called on the Government to Then there are all those third countries with which have documents that looked at the consequences of we currently enjoy free trade thanks to the trade leaving the European Union and the alternatives to agreements which the EU has: with Japan, South membership. There was some reluctance on the Korea, Mexico, Turkey and now the countries of Government Benches to produce such documents but Mercosur, among them two of the three largest eventually they did so. In addition, there was of course countries in Latin America. There are also the the notorious Treasury document that raised the spectre 50 associate countries in Africa, the Caribbean and of the massive implications of leaving the European the Pacific; we have free trade with them, too. All that Union. will be lost. There is plenty of work there for Dr Fox Those were government documents and perhaps just to get us back to where we were before we started. received relatively little scrutiny.During the referendum So there will be a hefty price to pay in just this one campaign, they were rubbished by the leave side. If sector to which I have referred—trade policy—and there is a case for a committee to look at these issues, it there are plenty of others that noble Lords have gone must be a committee of both Houses of Parliament through in this valuable debate. and not the Government marking their own homework. We need to know in detail what the costs for our We need full information, but it requires full and frank exporters are likely to be. We are told by Dominic discussion on a cross-party basis and across both Raab, who is no longer in the race to be Prime Houses. There needs to be truth and there needs to be Minister but who believed, I suppose, that he was trust. worthy of the post, that the first rule of negotiation is The noble Lord, Lord Bridges, eloquently articulated to be prepared to walk away. I am not sure where he the urgency of this matter and the things that need to got that from, because I looked at his CV and there be looked at—governmental preparations, legislative was not a lot of negotiation in it. Perhaps he had been preparations and business preparations. He is absolutely reading Donald Trump’s book, The Art of the right, but we on these Benches draw a slightly different Deal—in which case, heaven help him and heaven conclusion. They are the right questions to be asked, help us. I would happily debate with him his assertion but surely we are not going to ask the noble Lord, that you have to be prepared to walk away, because I Lord Callanan, just to go away, write that paper and have been through rather a lot of negotiations into bring it back. It requires all parties to be part of this. It which this country went in good faith with a is not just about the Executive; it is about the legislature determination to get a deal and did not suggest that it as well. It is about us doing our job as a responsible was prepared to walk away. Chamber. 1489 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[LORDS] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1490

[BARONESS SMITH OF NEWNHAM] my noble friend Lord Paddick talked about policing The noble Lord, Lord Robathan, raised some concerns. and about leaving the European arrest warrant and He seemed to think that this was an “unedifying” the Schengen Information System. There are so many Motion, asked questions about our role and thought areas where, if we simply leave on 31 October without that it was perhaps a little cynical and was simply a deal, this country will be in a precarious position. trying to tie the hands of a future Prime Minister. It is the duty of this House to be a responsible From a sedentary position, the noble Viscount, Chamber. We may not be elected but we are responsible. Lord Hailsham, said, “Well, of course, that’s what Part of our duty is to scrutinise the work of government, Parliaments do”. and on this key issue of national interest we have profound reservations about the economic and political Lord Robathan: Is it not the case that the Liberal consequences of a no-deal Brexit, not only for the Democrats wish to overturn the referendum result? United Kingdom as a whole but for the unity of this United Kingdom, as the noble Lord, Lord Reid, so eloquently discussed; the noble Lord, Lord Hain, extended Baroness Smith of Newnham: My Lords, this debate the implications to Northern Ireland and Wales. For is on a Motion to look at the consequences of no deal. all those reasons, it is vital that we take some sort of It has been pretty clear and in almost all cases very control, and setting up such a committee, or advocating focused. Many of us have been clear as to why we feel to the Commons that we do so, is a matter of urgency, there should be a committee; in fact, I have heard no to respond to all the very profound questions that the argument against it. The noble Lord, Lord Saatchi, noble Lord, Lord Bridges, and others raised. It is not seemed to suggest that the Motion did not go far too big a job: it is an essential job, and if it requires enough, but were it to be asked what this House has our working over the summer, so be it. done, surely the answer is that we have repeatedly demonstrated our concern about a no-deal Brexit, which is not in the national interest—a view that has 6.43 pm been expressed by the other place. Now is the time to Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town (Lab): My Lords, find a mechanism for us in this place to be creative if I was not worried about a no-deal exit at 3.30 pm, I about how we hold the Government to account. It is sure am now. The first duty of a Government is to the role of Parliament to hold the Government to protect their citizens and ensure their safety and their account. At a time of acute danger to the national economic and social well-being, but this House has interest, now is the time for us to be doing this. heard that a no-deal exit risks security at our borders, It has been an extraordinary debate. The noble Lord, loss of criminal intelligence, and loss of the European Lord Howell, channelled the noble Lord, Lord Owen— arrest warrant—even as the Prime Minister assures us who is not in his place—in suggesting that we could it can be used to capture the Skripal suspects should simply stay in the EEA. Your Lordships should they set foot in the EU. It risks an economic downturn, be prepared to be reminded by the noble Lord, meaning lower tax revenues and therefore cuts to Lord Callanan, that there have already been discussions services; reduced environmental protections; and major and this is not on the cards. losses to our farming community,with the NFU warning We heard the noble Lord, Lord Adonis, quoting that it would be “catastrophic”. We would get poorer Boris Johnson—a Boris Johnson who was actually trade deals, as we have heard, as we negotiate for articulating remaining in the European Union. Of 66 million rather than as part of a 500-million strong course, one of the candidates to be leader of the block. There are risks to the peace process in Ireland Conservative Party does have a tendency to change his and pressure on the union from Scotland and elsewhere. mind on European questions, so although at the moment We could see the sudden imposition of WTO tariffs, he is saying, “Do or die, leave on 31 October”, I will with no transition or standstill period, and there would not hold my breath, because I quite fancy living beyond be no mythical GATT 24 solution, which anyway 31 October. We heard the noble Lord, Lord Cormack, would not cover services. This would need EU agreement and the noble Viscount, Lord Hailsham, expressing in order to get WTO approval, as the noble Duke, the deep concern about the leadership campaigns in their Duke of Wellington, reminded us, whereas the whole party and, in particular, the dangers of prorogation. point of no deal is that there is no agreement. There Stopping prorogation is not something that this House would be no data transfers, on which legal and financial can do, but it would indeed be a constitutional outrage services, as well as trade and travel, depend. Economic and it is up to your Lordships’ House and the other uncertainty would cause reduced investment, as with place to ensure that it cannot happen. Vauxhall in Ellesmere Port already, and thus fewer The noble Lord, Lord Robathan, said that the jobs. Car manufacturing has already fallen over each people have spoken, and the noble Lord, Lord Howarth, of the past 12 months, its trade body warning us that a suggested we should all keep calm and carry on, but no-deal Brexit would be a “knockout blow”, while we heard about many areas of policy where the deal Japan’sForeign Minister urges Messrs Hunt and Johnson has not yet been sorted. We need to consider in great to avoid no deal, as Japanese car operations, detail what leaving the European Union will mean “may not be able to continue”. and, in particular, what no deal will mean. The noble Jeremy Hunt says that businesses going bust is “a Baroness, Lady Bull, talked about the creative industries. price worth paying”, but Make UK, representing The noble Lord, Lord Hunt, talked about the NHS. manufacturers, calls it an “act of economic vandalism”. The noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh of Pickering, The pharmaceutical industry says that by the time the talked about just-in-time delivery and logistics, and Conservatives have chosen their new leader, there will 1491 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[3 JULY 2019] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1492 be barely 100 days to plan and stockpile. Road hauliers, That committee could also hear from constitutional as we have just heard, are extraordinarily alarmed and experts to see whether the noble Lord, Lord Howell, is the warehousing industry thinks it does not have enough right to say that we could stay in the EEA—albeit of space. Meanwhile, the BMA foresees, course still outside the customs union, and still therefore “potentially catastrophic consequences across the health and needing border controls in Ireland or elsewhere—or social care sector”. whether the Government and the EU’s advisers are All this if we leave without a deal. correct, and that once we are out of the EU we are out of the EEA. Who pays for all this? It is British citizens, is it not? It is true that we cannot be sure of the costs and Because as the WTO tariffs kick in, food prices will go implications of a no-deal departure. I say to the noble up immediately. It is noticeable that while Jeremy Viscount, Lord Trenchard, that “implications” could Hunt promises to aid exporting farmers, he has said indeed look at the benefits as well as the costs. But why nothing about shoppers who buy imported and therefore not do that? Why not have this inquiry? Should we more expensive food. There may be shortages of fresh crash out, it is vital that government, local government, food within days, with Sainsbury’s forecasting enormous business, service providers, farmers, retailers, shoppers, disruption to supplies. Boris Johnson says that imports, importers, transporters, lawyers and consumers know “would rake in ¤35 billion in tariffs”, what to expect. That is why we need this inquiry. but that just means higher prices in the shops—something It could start with a summary, as the noble Lord, that does not seem to concern him. Lord Bridges, has suggested, but that can be only a A no-deal Brexit would further entail a loss of start. We must interrogate it; Parliament must be on automatic rights to work, live and study across top of it; the results of it must be before this Parliament, 27 countries; a loss of automatic recognition of driving Government and the people. Does the Minister have licences and car insurance; the end of EHIC and one good reason why we should not have those facts access to free medical treatment in the other 27 countries; and be able to interrogate them? possible shortages of vital medicines and treatments; reduced consumer protections; higher mobile phone 6.51 pm charges for those who still travel abroad; and cuts to Lord Callanan: My Lords, as always, I am grateful vital services as tax revenues fall. For UK citizens for the many interesting and thoughtful contributions living abroad across the 27, there would be real threats made on all sides in today’s debate as we address the to their rights to live, work, own property, drive on a Motion in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Smith. UK licence and get healthcare. So it is not just no deal, It is of course for this House, rather than the Government, but also no impact assessment and no identification of to determine the nature and configuration of its Select the risks, implications or costs of no deal: it is a blind Committees and how they can best support the House’s date going horribly wrong. And this at a time of consideration of EU exit. Needless to say,the Government maximum international insecurity, a narrowly avoided will seek to support and facilitate the work of committees US-China trade war—we hope—with Mr Putin in whatever form Parliament agrees is most effective forecasting the death of our liberal democracy in and appropriate. favour of populist nationalism, against which, of course, Let me start by directly addressing the question the EU is a vital bulwark. posed by my noble friend Lady McIntosh. If this To those who say this is all Project Fear, I say let us Motion is passed tonight, it will then be up to the see. If they are right, then there is nothing to fear from other place, if it wishes, to take forward a similar this inquiry: it will ease people’s concerns and reduce Motion to agree to the appointment of a Joint Committee, uncertainty. However, if others are right and the risks but it would of course have no legal effect on how we are real, not only do the Government need to know, so leave the European Union. It will be for the two does Parliament and so do the public. As the Institute Houses to consider whether they believe that they have for Government says: had insufficient opportunity and tools to consider the “The UK’s readiness for no deal must feature in decision Government’s approach to a no-deal exit. making”. We should not overlook the work of the existing The Government’s own work, on their proposed WTO committees of both Houses in this respect. Indeed, we schedules and the range of departure issues, is now should pay tribute to that work and recognise its scale massively out of date. Their economic analysis of and importance. The Secretary of State for Exiting the Brexit and the Bank of England’s paper were eight EU, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and months ago, and the Government’s Implications for Rural Affairs and the Chancellor of the Duchy of Business and Trade of a No Deal Exit was in February Lancaster have all recently given evidence to this House’s and envisaged a March, not an October, departure. EU Committee covering government preparations for David Lidington’s June Statement on preparedness no deal. As I am sure my right honourable friends will has never been subject to parliamentary scrutiny. That, attest, the committee has shown it has the will and the I am afraid, is why the summary of the noble Lord, tools to scrutinise the Government on no deal—as, Lord Bridges, is not enough. It must be interrogated indeed, it should. For instance, noble Lords will recall by Parliament in the way that the noble Baroness, its inquiry report, Brexit: Deal or No Deal, which built Lady Smith of Newnham, has said. It cannot just be, on evidence from government and a range of experts “This is it”, from the Government; we need to be able and stakeholders on both sides of the EU exit debate. to interrogate and test it. We must also hear from The report and the subsequent debate made a significant business, as the noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh, said, contribution to the House’sunderstanding of the potential to know whether these predictions are correct. consequences of no deal. 1493 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[LORDS] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1494

[LORD CALLANAN] example, the more than 550 statutory instruments to The sub-committees have also considered preparations date which have been laid before these Houses to for no deal in their specific areas of remit. For example, ensure a functioning statute book when we leave the the EU Energy and Environment Sub-Committee is EU in all scenarios. Departments continue to advance examining the UK’s preparations for a no-deal Brexit their no-deal preparations and are making sensible and the potential impact this could have on the agriculture, adjustments on the timing and pace at which certain fisheries, environment and energy sectors. In the other work is progressing so that we are ready to implement place, the Exiting the European Union Committee necessary work in the lead-up to 31 October, if needed. was appointed in July 2016 for the very purpose of The Treasury has allocated over £4.2 billion of additional scrutinising the Government’s work on EU exit. Since funding to departments and the devolved Administrations its formation, it has produced 16 reports, many of for EU exit preparations so far, including for no deal. which have considered the implications of no deal, However, no-deal spending cannot readily be separated alongside the over 40 reports produced by the European from deal spending, as in many cases the activities will Union Committee in this House during this Session be relevant in any exit scenario. alone. Indeed, the Exiting the European Union Committee’s inquiry on no deal is continuing; only For nearly three years, the Government have been last week, the committee took evidence from industry working to ensure that people and businesses are experts in the services sector regarding the implications prepared for all scenarios. For example, the Government of no deal. I am sure that this Motion is not intended have published over 750 pieces of no-deal communications to undermine the considerable work of that committee, since October 2018, including 106 technical notices the committee chaired by the noble Lord, Lord Boswell explaining to businesses and citizens exactly what they of Aynho, or the other sub-committees. However, we need to do to prepare. In answer to the point made by should recognise that there are committees already in my noble friend Lord Bridges, we are continuing our place which can and do continue to provide the high- work to roll over international agreements. We have quality and timely analysis that the noble Baroness currently agreed trade agreements with partners who says she is seeking. account for over £70 billion of current trade. On If we need any illustration that the structures as 10 June, we agreed in principle an agreement with they stand are capable of effectively scrutinising the South Korea which represents another £15 billion. We Government on preparations for EU exit, DExEU have also established the EU settlement scheme, which Ministers alone have given evidence to Select Committees is now fully open, with over 800,000 applications so on 48 occasions, spending over 4,000 minutes answering far. This will continue to be run and to be supported, questions put to them on no deal and other EU regardless of a deal or no-deal scenario. matters. In addition, there is no need for a formal Joint Committee to be appointed to bring the particular My noble friend Lord Howell addressed the issue expertise of each House together. Committees of either of EEA membership, and the noble Baroness, Lady Smith House can choose to hold joint meetings, including of Newnham, also raised this point. Let me say to my joint evidence sessions, if they so wish. noble friend that our view is clear. When we leave the EU, we leave the EEA in the absence of any further The possibility of the United Kingdom exiting the action. Rejoining would require EFTA membership, European Union without a deal has effectively been which may not be a straightforward matter, and we on the table since Parliament voted to support the would need the agreement of all of the existing EFTA triggering of Article 50 in March 2017. While the members. I should also remind my noble friend that, Government continue to believe that leaving the EU when similar proposals were considered during the with a deal is the best outcome, the House of Commons indicative votes in the other place, they were defeated has rejected leaving on the terms we have negotiated on both occasions. three times. Without a withdrawal agreement having been agreed, leaving without a deal remains the legal My noble friend Lord Bridges also raised the subject default at the end of 31 October 2019. of business readiness. For two years, the Government I am getting a little weary of listening to the litany have been implementing a significant programme of of complaints from Labour and Liberal Democrat work to ensure that we will be ready from day one in Members about the possible effects of no deal who all scenarios. The UK wants businesses to be reassured simultaneously vote against the deal that we have that, even in a no-deal scenario, the Government will negotiated. To be fair to the Liberal Democrats, which seek to do what they can to make the transition as I do not generally like to be, they are up-front and smooth as possible and allow them time to make honest about the fact that they want to stop Brexit. significant changes. We are continuing to engage with Labour, meanwhile, tells us that it wants to respect the a wide range of stakeholders to support industry result of the referendum. Indeed, the noble Lord, preparedness, including trade bodies, ports, hauliers, Lord Adonis, told us that during his failed MEP ferry companies and freight forwarders. The Border election campaign; the noble Lord standing on a Delivery Group has run and will continue to run a platform of respecting the referendum result—he told series of local, national and international stakeholder us so in one of his leaflets—was one of the most events, working with intermediaries in the UK and enjoyable facts of that miserable campaign. Most amusing Europe, to directly engage with business and answer it was. questions. We have held a series of domestic and As a responsible Government, we continue to prepare international events, and webinars have been hosted to for all Brexit scenarios. The delivery of much of this support business readiness. Online content, bulletins, work is vital in both deal and no-deal scenarios: for leaflets, videos and other materials are being disseminated 1495 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[3 JULY 2019] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1496 on a range of border-related subjects in several different Somehow the Minister’s argument that the Government languages to support business preparations on no can force a bad deal on the country to try to avoid no deal. deal, when they promised a good deal, is totally The noble Lord, Lord Hain, again with great passion, unacceptable. He says that they have appointed people raised the issue of Ireland. Let me reiterate once again to all the positions of those who have left, but we still that, in the event of no deal, the UK Government do not have in your Lordships’ House a Minister for would not introduce any new checks or controls on International Trade. goods crossing from Ireland to Northern Ireland, In answer to the question what will happen if this including any customs declarations for nearly all goods. Motion is passed tonight—I had hoped the Minister The UK’s wider temporary tariff regime would therefore was going to say, “Yes, what a good idea”, but I should not apply to goods crossing from Ireland to Northern have known better—it will be reported to the House of Ireland. This approach is unilateral and it is strictly Commons. It will then be for the House of Commons temporary. Because these are unilateral measures, they to decide whether it wants to join us in having a Joint only mitigate the impacts from exit that are within this Select Committee of both Houses to examine the Government’s control. These measures do not set out implications of a no-deal Brexit, using all the information the position in respect of tariffs or processes to be that is currently to hand with the powers it will have as applied to goods moving from Northern Ireland to a Select Committee. This provides an opportunity for Ireland. In a no-deal scenario, we would need to have the House of Commons to ensure that happens, and urgent discussions with the European Commission the committee would then publicise the information, and the Irish Government to jointly agree longer-term some of which the Government have been very reluctant measures. to admit to, of what it really means—the good, as the The noble Lord, Lord Anderson of Ipswich, referred noble Viscount, Lord Trenchard, thinks there must be, to staffing changes in my department. Let me tell him but definitely the bad as well. that, when a staff member leaves any role in the Civil We gave the Minister an opportunity today to Service, arrangements are made so that business continues accept what almost everybody who has spoken in the as normal, and in my department careful succession debate thinks is a positive way forward. In view of his planning has been put in place to ensure the department very disappointing response, I wish to test the opinion maintains its high standards of delivery. of the House. The noble Lord also asked about five EU exit Bills currently before Parliament. We are of course working 7.06 pm with colleagues across the House to resolve the outstanding concerns on these critical pieces of legislation to deliver Division on Baroness Smith of Basildon’s Motion our exit, and we will look to progress them as soon as possible. However, I can assure all noble Lords that all Contents 245; Not-Contents 99. of the necessary primary legislation needed by exit day to deliver a smooth exit from the EU is in place, Motion agreed. including the more than 500 statutory instruments that have already been laid. Division No. 1 The work that Her Majesty’s Government are undertaking to prepare for no deal was set out in CONTENTS detail, as referred to by the noble Baroness, Lady Hayter, Aberdare, L. Brinton, B. in a Written Ministerial Statement, from the Chancellor Addington, L. Brooke of Alverthorpe, L. of the Duchy of Lancaster on 26 June 2019, which Adonis, L. Brookman, L. addresses many of the issues that have been raised by Alderdice, L. Browne of Ladyton, L. Alli, L. Bruce of Bennachie, L. noble Lords this evening. Altmann, B. Bryan of Partick, B. This House has played, and will continue to play, a Amos, B. Bull, B. crucial role in preparing for the UK’s departure from Anderson of Ipswich, L. Burnett, L. the European Union. It has had ample opportunity to Anderson of Swansea, L. Burt of Solihull, B. provide comprehensive and timely analysis of all the Andrews, B. Butler of Brockwell, L. Armstrong of Hill Top, B. Campbell of Pittenweem, L. options for our exit from the EU and has demonstrated Bach, L. Campbell-Savours, L. itself to be more than capable of doing so. It is not Balfe, L. Carrington, L. clear what additional value this proposal will add at Barker, B. Carter of Coles, L. this late stage of the process. I am, therefore, not able Bassam of Brighton, L. Cashman, L. to support the Motion proposed by the noble Baroness, Beecham, L. Chakrabarti, B. Lady Smith, this evening. Beith, L. Chandos, V. Benjamin, B. Clancarty, E. Berkeley, L. Clark of Windermere, L. 7.04 pm Best, L. Clement-Jones, L. Bilimoria, L. Collins of Highbury, L. Baroness Smith of Basildon: My Lords, I am an Blackstone, B. Cormack, L. optimist, but I have to say that this is the Minister that Blunkett, L. Cotter, L. consistently disappoints. I found his arguments this Boateng, L. Crawley, B. evening unimpressive and unconvincing. We have a Boothroyd, B. Cunningham of Felling, L. Bowles of Berkhamsted, B. Davidson of Glen Clova, L. new exit date. We are going to have a new Prime Boycott, B. Davies of Oldham, L. Minister, whoever it is, who tells us they are relaxed Bradley, L. Deben, L. about no deal, which makes it a very real possibility. Bragg, L. Desai, L. 1497 Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee[LORDS] Brexit: Appointment of Joint Committee 1498

Dholakia, L. Mandelson, L. Thornhill, B. Waverley, V. Donaghy, B. Masham of Ilton, B. Thornton, B. Wellington, D. Donoughue, L. Maxton, L. Thurso, V. West of Spithead, L. Doocey, B. McAvoy, L. [Teller] Tomlinson, L. Wheatcroft, B. Drake, B. McConnell of Glenscorrodale, Tonge, B. Wheeler, B. Tope, L. D’Souza, B. L. Whitaker, B. Dubs, L. McIntosh of Hudnall, B. Touhig, L. Triesman, L. Whitty, L. Dykes, L. McKenzie of Luton, L. Wigley, L. Elder, L. McNally, L. Truscott, L. Tunnicliffe, L. [Teller] Williams of Elvel, L. Falconer of Thoroton, L. McNicol of West Kilbride, L. Willis of Knaresborough, L. Faulkner of Worcester, L. Meacher, B. Turnberg, L. Tyler, L. Wills, L. Filkin, L. Miller of Chilthorne Domer, Winston, L. Finkelstein, L. B. Uddin, B. Woolmer of Leeds, L. Finlay of Llandaff, B. Monks, L. Wallace of Saltaire, L. Foster of Bath, L. Morgan of Huyton, B. Wallace of Tankerness, L. Wrigglesworth, L. Foulkes of Cumnock, L. Morgan, L. Watkins of Tavistock, B. Young of Norwood Green, L. Fox, L. Morris of Handsworth, L. Watson of Invergowrie, L. Young of Old Scone, B. Gale, B. Murphy of Torfaen, L. Garden of Frognal, B. Neuberger, B. NOT CONTENTS German, L. Newby, L. Giddens, L. Northbrook, L. Agnew of Oulton, L. Lansley, L. Goddard of Stockport, L. Northover, B. Ahmad of Wimbledon, L. Lilley, L. Golding, B. Nye, B. Anelay of St Johns, B. Lindsay, E. Goudie, B. Oates, L. Ashton of Hyde, L. Lingfield, L. Grantchester, L. O’Neill of Bengarve, B. Astor of Hever, L. MacGregor of Pulham Greaves, L. O’Neill of Clackmannan, L. Barran, B. Market, L. Grender, B. Osamor, B. Bew, L. Mancroft, L. Grey-Thompson, B. Paddick, L. Blackwood of North Oxford, Marland, L. Griffiths of Burry Port, L. Palmer of Childs Hill, L. B. McColl of Dulwich, L. Hailsham, V. Parekh, L. Bloomfield of Hinton McCrea of Magherafelt and Hain, L. Parminter, B. Waldrist, B. Cookstown, L. Hamwee, B. Patel of Bradford, L. Borwick, L. Meyer, B. Hannay of Chiswick, L. Pendry, L. Bottomley of Nettlestone, B. Morris of Bolton, B. Hanworth, V. Pinnock, B. Bourne of Aberystwyth, L. Morrow, L. Harris of Haringey, L. Pitkeathley, B. Brabazon of Tara, L. Neville-Rolfe, B. Harris of Richmond, B. Ponsonby of Shulbrede, L. Bridgeman, V. Noakes, B. Haskel, L. Prashar, B. Bridges of Headley, L. Norton of Louth, L. Haworth, L. Primarolo, B. Brougham and Vaux, L. O’Cathain, B. Hayman, B. Purvis of Tweed, L. Browne of Belmont, L. O’Loan, B. Hayter of Kentish Town, B. Radice, L. Caithness, E. Patten, L. Healy of Primrose Hill, B. Ramsay of Cartvale, B. Callanan, L. Polak, L. Heseltine, L. Randerson, B. Carrington of Fulham, L. Popat, L. Hollick, L. Razzall, L. Colgrain, L. Powell of Bayswater, L. Howe of Idlicote, B. Redesdale, L. Cope of Berkeley, L. Price, L. Hoyle, L. Rees of Ludlow, L. Courtown, E. [Teller] Randall of Uxbridge, L. Hughes of Woodside, L. Reid of Cardowan, L. Couttie, B. Reay, L. Humphreys, B. Rennard, L. De Mauley, L. Redfern, B. Hunt of Chesterton, L. Roberts of Llandudno, L. Dixon-Smith, L. Risby, L. Hunt of Kings Heath, L. Rodgers of Quarry Bank, L. Fairfax of Cameron, L. Robathan, L. Hussein-Ece, B. Rosser, L. Flight, L. Rogan, L. Irvine of Lairg, L. Royall of Blaisdon, B. Fookes, B. Sater, B. Jolly, B. Russell of Liverpool, L. Forsyth of Drumlean, L. Seccombe, B. Jones of Cheltenham, L. Sandwich, E. Freeman, L. Selkirk of Douglas, L. Jones of Whitchurch, B. Sawyer, L. Gardiner of Kimble, L. Sheikh, L. Judd, L. Scott of Needham Market, B. Gardner of Parkes, B. Shephard of Northwold, B. Judge, L. Sharkey, L. Geddes, L. Sherbourne of Didsbury, L. Kennedy of Cradley, B. Sheehan, B. Geidt, L. Shinkwin, L. Kennedy of The Shaws, B. Sherlock, B. Glenarthur, L. Stedman-Scott, B. Kerr of Kinlochard, L. Shipley, L. Gold, L. Stowell of Beeston, B. Kinnock of Holyhead, B. Shutt of Greetland, L. Goldie, B. Strathclyde, L. Kinnock, L. Simon, V. Goschen, V. Sugg, B. Kirkwood of Kirkhope, L. Smith of Basildon, B. Greenway, L. Taylor of Holbeach, L. Knight of Weymouth, L. Smith of Finsbury, L. Haselhurst, L. [Teller] Kramer, B. Smith of Newnham, B. Helic, B. Taylor of Warwick, L. Krebs, L. Snape, L. Henley, L. Thurlow, L. Layard, L. Soley, L. Hogan-Howe, L. Trenchard, V. Lea of Crondall, L. Somerset, D. Howe, E. Trimble, L. Lee of Trafford, L. Stern of Brentford, L. Howell of Guildford, L. Ullswater, V. Leitch, L. Stern, B. Hunt of Wirral, L. Whitby, L. Lennie, L. Stevenson of Balmacara, L. Jenkin of Kennington, B. Wilcox, B. Levy, L. Stoneham of Droxford, L. Kilclooney, L. Williams of Trafford, B. Lipsey, L. Storey, L. Lamont of Lerwick, L. Younger of Leckie, V. Lister of Burtersett, B. Strasburger, L. Listowel, E. Stunell, L. Livermore, L. Symons of Vernham Dean, B. Loomba, L. Taverne, L. MacKenzie of Culkein, L. Taylor of Bolton, B. Maddock, B. Teverson, L. 1499 SS “Richard Montgomery” [3 JULY 2019] SS “Richard Montgomery” 1500

SS “Richard Montgomery” in the forward holds. However, this is in conflict with Question for Short Debate the ship’s original cargo manifest and the meticulous daily records of the salvage operation. These suggest 7.22 pm that the vessel took on 35,943 individual explosive items, of which 13,961 remain. The salvage operation Asked by Lord Harris of Haringey mainly removed the smaller bombs and shells, so those that remain packed on racks in the forward holds To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action amount to slightly more than half the explosive weight they are taking to mitigate the risks posed by the of the original cargo—some 3,105 tonnes. This is wreck of SS Richard Montgomery. more than double the figure quoted by the MCA. Can the Minister explain why there is such a discrepancy? Lord Harris of Haringey (Lab): My Lords, in February Was the salvage operation much more effective than last year City Airport was closed while a 500-kilogram those who conducted it said at the time—this sounds unexploded World War II bomb was made safe. This inherently implausible—or have 1,700 tonnes of munitions short debate is about a much larger volume of unexploded been removed surreptitiously over the last 75 years and highly dangerous munitions that has been in without anyone noticing? Perhaps, as the state of the shallow water in the Medway channel near Sheerness wreck has deteriorated, the bombs and shells have for 75 years. I am grateful to Professor David Alexander simply fallen out and are on the sea bed. That presumably of University College London for briefing me extensively means they are still in close proximity to the rest of the on this matter. explosive cargo and remain as big a collective threat. The SS “Richard Montgomery” was built in 1943 Certainly, some phosphorus has escaped from the by the St Johns River Shipbuilding Company of munitions and risen to the surface of the water, where Jacksonville, Florida, which built 82 Liberty ships for it has caught fire on contact with the atmosphere. At the US Government over three years. The emphasis least 40 such instances were reported in one year was on speed rather than quality—after all, there was alone. How often have such incidents been recorded in a war on—and the ships were regarded as expendable. the past decade, and what threat do they pose to the Her construction time was just 137 days—not bad for rest of the cargo? My fundamental question to the a vessel 4.5 times the length of your Lordships’Chamber. Minister is: what is the state of the munitions that The hull plating was welded rather than riveted, so remain? How has that assessment been made? If an was more susceptible to cracking, and the low-grade unexploded half-tonne bomb was still regarded as steel used becomes brittle in the cold waters of the sufficient a threat to close City Airport last year, North Atlantic. The ships were not built to last, and presumably these 1,400 tonnes of munitions on the indeed the SS “Richard Montgomery” did not. After MCA figures—let alone the 3,100 tonnes estimated several trips across the Atlantic, in August 1944 she from the manifest and the salvage records—are, by was loaded with 6,225 tonnes of high-explosive bombs orders of magnitude, a far greater threat. and detonators and arrived in the Thames estuary. The King’s harbourmaster—actually based in In 1970 the Royal Military College of Science prepared Southend—instructed her to moor at Sheerness middle an assessment of what would happen if the entire sands in about 10 metres of water. This was unwise, as remaining cargo were to explode: a 3,000 metre-high the vessel had a draught of 9.45 metres and a very full column of water and debris and a five metre-high cargo. tsunami. This would overwhelm Sheerness and the water wave, possibly carrying burning phosphorus, On Sunday 20 August there was a force 8 gale. The would reach the petrochemical installation on the Isle ship dragged her anchor and ran aground. As the tide of Grain. Does the Minister accept the analysis of the ebbed, her plates began to buckle and crack. Not Royal Military College of Science? If not, why not? surprisingly, given the cargo, the captain and his crew Indeed, what is the current assessment of the effect of took to the lifeboats. On 24 August one of the holds the entire cargo exploding? was breached, and two weeks later the ship’s back broke. Extensive salvage efforts took place over the A more recent risk assessment was conducted in next month, and most of the ammunition from two of 1999. I understand that it remains classified. Why? the five holds was removed, until the operations were Are the conclusions so serious that the public cannot abandoned as it became too dangerous to continue. It be told? Has the Minister read it and will she undertake no doubt helped that the Admiralty had ruled that the to place a copy in the Library? stevedores concerned should not receive danger money. There are limited ways in and out of the Isles of Since then the wreck has remained essentially Sheppey and Grain, either for the emergency services untouched, with its masts protruding above the surface, to converge in numbers and at speed or, for that 2.4 kilometres from Sheerness and its population of matter, for people to evacuate. What contingency plans 11,000. Three to five kilometres to the south-west is are in place to handle such an emergency and when the Isle of Grain, with its oil-fired power station, four were they last rehearsed? What is the assessment of storage tanks for liquefied natural gas—each the size the risk of a tidal wave travelling up the River Thames of the Royal Albert Hall—and another 18 oil storage and reaching London? These are not circumstances in tanks. It is situated less than 200 metres from a busy which the Thames Barrier, which takes up to 90 minutes shipping lane. to close, would be of much use. So how much explosive remains on the wreck? In its Another worrying factor is the proximity of shipping. most recent report, the Maritime and Coastguard More than 5,000 vessels pass the wreck each year. Agency says there are 1,400 tonnes of explosives contained Until 1978 there were 24 near misses, but later figures 1501 SS “Richard Montgomery” [LORDS] SS “Richard Montgomery” 1502 are not available.Perhaps this is because of two potentially the coastline that we are discussing this evening where catastrophic incidents in May 1980. In the first, the the Liberty ship “Richard Montgomery”rests or indeed “MV Fletching” grazed one of the marker buoys and all over London every time there is deep excavation or came within 15 metres of the wreck. Later that week groundworks preparing a site for some heavyweight the Danish-registered “Mare Altum”, a chemical tanker high-rise building to be constructed. The risks are of almost 1,600 gross tonnage carrying low-flashpoint always there, whether they are of unexploded bombs toluene, was on a collision course and disaster was or risks to our architectural or archaeological heritage. averted only minutes before it would have hit the Risks are there all the time. wreck. The consequences of that would have been In making my third point, I should declare where unthinkable. How many near misses have there been in my interest has come from and how it has been piqued the period since then? because this is not a well-known special subject for me In 2017, a paddle-boarder posted a picture on in your Lordships’ House. A few years ago—I have social media of himself balanced on the wreck and always thought it was an excellent decision—I took pleasure boats often come close. In 1969, as a prank, the precaution of marrying an Essex girl. She was students from Kent University phoned the police born and brought up in the northern part of Essex: threatening to blow the wreck up. Not surprisingly, estuarine Essex on the sea. That is one reason. Secondly, that led to a massive security operation. A similar I learned a lot from her because her distinguished operation was mounted during the 2012 Olympics, grandfather, Commander Lightoller, went down with according to one source because a speedboat carrying the Titanic. He happily popped up again and survived three men and explosives was intercepted nearby. Was and had the great honour of being played in “A Night that security operation simply precautionary or was it to Remember” by Kenneth More. He was a very brave in response to a specific threat? Indeed, what mitigations sailor in the First World War, cruising up and down in are in place to prevent a terrorist attack on the wreck? his destroyers in the North Sea dealing with U-boat The SS “Richard Montgomery” is owned by the threats and got a clutch of distinguished service crosses. United States Government. In 1948 and 1967, the US offered to make the wreck safe. Both offers were Towards the end of his life, he went out in his own turned down. Why were those offers rejected? What ship, the “Sundowner”, from London down that very were the last communications with the US on this estuary, not very far from this wreck, and proceeded matter and are the US Government still liable for the in Operation Dynamo to load up “Sundowner” with damage caused if the wreck explodes? As far as I am 127 soldiers and bring them back from Dunkirk. Four aware, every other wreck with such a dangerous cargo years later, of course, trying to help the Allied efforts, in the immediate waters around the British Isles has the ship that we are discussing came to an end. That is been made safe. Can the Minister confirm that this is why I have been particularly interested in this. I have the case and, if so, why has this wreck been left alone? read quite a lot of the stuff to which the noble Lord The Government’s policy appears to be to bury referred and I will not repeat it, because he has given their head in the Sheerness sands, presumably in the us a masterly tour d’horizon. hope that the problem will simply go away. Every year, My fourth point, which is important for noble however, the fabric of the wreck disintegrates further Lords to consider, is that no one, to the best of my and, as surveys look at only its external condition, knowledge, has died because of this wreck, including nothing is known about the contents and their condition. the very brave stevedores who went out on the wreck Any of the munitions found elsewhere on their own for some weeks, as the noble Lord said, trying to would immediately trigger a major evacuation and an unload and empty some of the munitions from this emergency. So why are the Government so relaxed Liberty ship before it sank deeper and the task became about thousands of such bombs and shells deteriorating absolutely impossible. Nor has anyone ever been harmed together in an unstable environment, unguarded and who has been involved in the continuous and detailed unprotected? Why has nothing been done for 75 years? monitoring of what may be the most monitored shipwreck Why is there no plan to make the wreck safe? Perhaps in the world. I do not know whether it is or not, but it the biggest question of all is: who will take responsibility must be high on the list of those that might be—quite for what happens if it all goes wrong? rightly. I do not know how much all this monitoring costs and I will not ask my noble friend Lady Barran 7.33 pm to come up with a total figure because that will take a Lord Patten (Con): My Lords, I congratulate the shedload of calculations from civil servants and take noble Lord, Lord Harris of Haringey, on the way in even more money away from what should be spent on which he has assembled his arguments and the continuing to safeguard this wreck by the detailed thoroughness with which he has presented them to the calculations and monitoring of the Department for House—and also on the slight note of passion in his Transport and the Maritime and Coastguard Agency. voice. Obviously he knows this subject extremely well. Of course, we have had reassurances in the past from I have four points to make and none of them seeks to Mr Boris Johnson that, should his island airport ever undermine health and safety matters—I am not a be built quite close by, it would not be a problem—so I jeerer at health and safety matters at all. First, the am reassured by that, as I am sure the whole House is. excellent wartime tag, Keep Calm and Carry On, is a The sorts of surveys that are being conducted are pretty good one provided that one is not complacent. not cheap. More is being spent on the current My second point is that risk assessments of threats environmental monitoring following the earlier wreck to life and property are a real public good—of course, surveys completed by the Maritime and Coastguard I agree with the noble Lord about that—whether on Agency in 2017 and 2018, and we are told to expect 1503 SS “Richard Montgomery” [3 JULY 2019] SS “Richard Montgomery” 1504 the report on the 2018 survey in the fourth quarter of Interestingly, I am told that when the large LNG this year. I hope that those responsible in the Department vessels go past it within 150 metres, they have an for Transport will ensure the publication of that escort of three tugs. That is a very expensive piece of environmental assessment. We certainly need to be kit. One wonders why somebody has suggested that told about it. Nothing is being wasted by all the LNG carriers need tugs, but other ships do not. They money that has been spent. It has been spent to just go up under the Nore pilotage operations with no protect people, land and life. It has also led to considerable extra precautions. It seems to me that the biggest risk advances, which are not to be sneered at, in the science is of somebody or some ship or something colliding that has been developed in this monitoring, which with the SS “Richard Montgomery” and setting off an should be welcomed. explosion, as my noble friend has said. Much good science has been spun off into marine My noble friend has also described a number of archaeology and other sub-sea surface work, particularly instances where ships have not gone where they were the use of lasers,so monitoring is not a wasted undertaking supposed to have gone in spite of having a pilot on in any sense at all. Others using such analytics might board. I know of one instance on the River Thames be helped in respect of maritime rescue in other ways. where a pilot got on board the ship as it was coming Of course, with the growth of data analytics worldwide, in. When the pilot went up on the bridge, he shook there are such a lot of wrecks like this around the hands with the skipper,looked to see what the navigation world that I suspect there is a lot of big data analysis equipment was like and whether it worked, and went of the handling of such wrecks, albeit in different through the usual routine. Was there a depth sounder? environments—not all in the plashy Thames estuary No, it did not work. Was there a compass? No, it was but in tropical waters and elsewhere. jammed. Was there radar? No, the fuse was gone. What about navigational equipment such as GPS? No, All through this process, there has been a great that did not work either. In the end, the pilot said to advance in learning. However, I think that the next the skipper, “Well, can you tell us where you have time—and I bet that this is the case in the fourth come from?” He said, “I came from Stockholm”. The quarter—we have a report published, it will repeat pilot then said, “How did you navigate from Stockholm that the risk of a major explosion is believed to be to the Thames?” The answer was, “Well, I followed remote. “Believed” is a key word, because it protects that ship over there”. This is the kind of shipping that the writer, quite rightly. It is their belief, and no one we have to deal with. can be certain because some of the things that the noble Lord has pointed to could well happen. The risk I live in Cornwall and we had an instance about is as remote or as present as it has ever been: I do not three months ago when a freight ship going to the Isles think that there is necessarily a cumulative growth in of Scilly was going into the dock and the skipper the risk. We need to continue monitoring, and so, with decided to slow down and turned to starboard to that thought in mind, I return to how I opened my berth, and for some reason the ship decided to go brief speech and say, “Keep calm and carry on straight ahead at full speed and hit a fishing boat. monitoring”. Okay, it was not a 70,000-tonne tanker, but these things do go wrong. Any of those examples and many more could cause a ship to hit the “Richard 7.41 pm Montgomery”. Lord Berkeley (Lab): My Lords, I congratulate my My final point, which is new to discussions like this noble friend on not only securing this debate but in the past few years, is about the ability of a drone to giving us such an interesting and thorough description do the same thing. We know that drones can bomb of what the situation appears to have been in the past people; we know that they can interfere with airports, and what it is today. Certainly, I would not accept the which happened last Christmas, but there is no reason view of the noble Lord, Lord Patten, that the risk is not to suppose that if anybody wanted to cause serious remote. As my noble friend said, we need evidence. trouble they could put a bomb on a drone and decide There is an awful lot of other evidence suggesting that to bomb the SS “Richard Montgomery”. They might these kinds of explosives, having been sitting on the think it was fun. It is a risk that we have to take. seabed for 70 years or so, actually get more dangerous rather than less, but we have to wait for the report. If we still accept the evidence that this kind of cargo on the ship is pretty unstable and could go up My interest in this is that I have often sailed past the with the slightest incentive, then we have to take very site, and it is nice that there are 12 buoys marking it seriously the possibility of anybody hitting it with and that there is an exclusion zone. I am grateful to anything from the air or the sea. I am told that there is some of my colleagues in the United Kingdom Maritime a way of removing most of the cargo from the ship in Pilots Association, of which I am honorary president. a safe manner. It seems to me that we have a duty not One of the pilots from the Medway, Ian McMahon, only to press the Government for the information that sent me a little bit of information about what it is like my noble friend has asked for but to get the widest taking big ships past it several times a day. It is very possible expert procedure and method statement of close: it is monitored, they say, by 24-hour CCTV and how the cargo could be removed. The sooner this is 24-hour radar. I am told that if anything enters the done the better, because it is going to go on breaking zone, the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, SOSRep, up, as my noble friend said, and at some stage if it the Receiver of Wreck and the duty marine manager breaks up that much, perhaps the explosives will go are notified. That is all very good: it needs monitoring, over the seabed, but perhaps some of it will come to as the noble Lord, Lord Patten, said. the surface and cause some very nasty accidents. It is 1505 SS “Richard Montgomery” [LORDS] SS “Richard Montgomery” 1506 in a pretty built-up area, and we owe it to everybody Sheerness is no stranger to explosions.On 26 November who lives around there to get this sorted as soon as 1914, HMS “Bulwark”, a pre-dreadnought battleship possible. which was moored a little way up the Medway, exploded while loading ammunition, killing some 750 of her 7.47 pm crew. On 27 May 1915, HMS “Princess Irene”, a new ferry built for the Canadian Pacific Railway but taken Lord Greenway (CB): My Lords,I share the gratefulness up on completion by the Royal Navy for conversion to of the House to the noble Lord, Lord Harris, for a minelayer, exploded while loading mines at a buoy introducing this short debate with some expert knowledge. off Port Victoria, which is approximately three miles He seemed surprised that the Liberty ship was built in west-south-west of Sheerness, prior to making her 137 days. One of them was actually built in four days. third voyage; 352 persons were killed, including most Although they were built to last for only one voyage of the ship’s company and 78 dockyard workers who across the Atlantic, after the war many of these Liberty were on board to strengthen the improvised gun decks. ships went on to work for the Greeks and other It later transpired that the mines were in the process of nations for some 20 years. They were not quite as being activated, but the job was done in somewhat of rough as they were made out to be. I must say to the a hurry by untrained staff. noble Lord, Lord Patten, that I had the great pleasure of sailing across to Dunkirk in the “Sundowner” in I now continue with the history lesson and turn 1990 on the 50th anniversary of the Dunkirk evacuation. to two subsequent ship explosions, which may have some relevance in terms of a worst-case scenario. On 6 December 1917, two merchant vessels collided at Lord Patten: If the noble Lord will allow me, I hope slow speed in what are known as the Narrows at the he will hitch a ride next year, in 2020, to celebrate the entrance to Halifax harbour in Nova Scotia. The 80th anniversary of the little ships going and coming departing Norwegian steamer “Imo”—I get confused back. The “Sundowner” will, for sure, be in that fleet here, because the International Maritime Organization of little ships. is known as IMO—which had originally been built for the White Star Line, struck a French steamer, the Lord Greenway: I thank the noble Lord for the “Mont-Blanc”, which was arriving from New York invitation, but I am chairman of the preservation loaded with some 3,000 tons of gun-cotton and TNT society of the old London fire boat, the “Massey and had barrels of benzol and picric acid on deck, all Shaw”, which is another Dunkirk veteran, so I may be destined for the war in Europe. The shock of the committed already. collision dislodged some of the deck cargo, allowing vapour to escape, which was ignited by sparks as the As we have heard, this wreck is surveyed constantly, two vessels drew apart. The burning “Mont-Blanc” at least once or twice a year. It was last done in drifted ashore near Pier 6 on the Halifax waterfront February and March of this year, and another survey and exploded 20 minutes later,killing around 2,000 persons is due in August. Huge improvements in the efficiency and injuring another 9,000. All structures within a of side-scanning sonar have meant that surveys can half-mile radius were obliterated, with 400 acres seriously usually be accomplished in just two days—compared damaged. Some reports speak of a 60 foot tsunami with many days, with weather hold-ups, in the past—and which washed the “Imo” ashore on the opposite side we can now measure very accurately any changes in of the harbour. the deterioration of the wreck, even down to centimetres. The noble Lord mentioned the possibility of some The second explosion concerned the “Fort Stikine”, of the bombs having spilled out of the ship. If they another emergency war-built vessel, but not a Liberty had done, they would have been quickly picked up by ship—she was a Fort built in Canada. She had a the new sonar, and there is no evidence that I can see part-cargo of 1,400 tons of explosives. When she blew that that has happened. In addition, a remote sensing up, it destroyed a large part of the dock area in tripod has been placed on the sea floor to measure any Bombay in two separate blasts on 14 April 1944. environmental changes—the noble Lord, Lord Patten, Thirteen other ships were sunk and a similar number referred to this—including changes to the seabed, were badly damaged, while a shower of burning debris which is constantly scoured by the tide coming out of set fire to a nearby slum area. Some reports say that the River Medway. 850 people perished, but the exact figure is not known The Maritime and Coastguard Agency, which is the and it is likely to be a lot more than that. In addition, official Receiver of Wreck in inshore waters, engages 50,000 people lost their jobs. To give some idea of the an internationally recognised survey company to carry destruction, it took 8,000 men seven months to remove out the work. It either uses one of its own vessels or, if the debris and get the docks working again but, somewhat that is not available, it takes one of the Port of London surprisingly, almost all the gold bars being carried by Authority’s well-equipped survey vessels, which have the “Fort Stikine” in 31 wooden crates, four to a crate, the added advantages of knowing the waters and were later recovered. being more or less on the spot, as they are based in I have mentioned these examples to indicate what Gravesend. I understand that a technical adviser from can happen when an ammunition ship explodes, but in the MoD is on board at all times during the surveys. three of the examples I have given, heat was the I also understand that the Department for Transport ultimate cause of the blasts. In HMS “Bulwark”, has set up an expert advisory panel which initially met explosives were being stored temporarily too close to a every two months but now, I gather, tends to meet boiler room, and the “Fort Stikine” had developed a whenever new evidence comes to light. fire in her part-cargo of cotton bales, which were 1507 SS “Richard Montgomery” [3 JULY 2019] SS “Richard Montgomery” 1508 stowed beneath the ammunition. In addition, the Halifax small ship will mean hundreds of tonnes travelling and Bombay explosions occurred literally within their and, even at a few miles an hour, there will still be an respective cities, which multiplied the damage. enormous impact. Compared with these, the “Richard Montgomery” A ship was mentioned that was sailed more or less wreck is situated 1.5 miles off Sheerness and five miles by good luck and dead reckoning. My historical from Southend, and the munitions remaining on board knowledge says that we gave that up as an official have now been submerged for 75 years, as the noble guide in the 18th century. If that is still going on, this Lord, Lord Harris, said. A former bomb disposal type of impact is a possibility. Are those munitions expert who advised the Government on the cargo of going to be ignited by that or would enough of them be? the “Richard Montgomery” has said that water is a It was also suggested in some of the briefing we good mitigator in preventing detonations. received that if a large amount of sand were to be put over the ship you would further lessen the risk. What is There are, of course, worries about Sheerness and the possibility of doing that type of risk-reduction the LNG terminal and storage facilities on the opposite process? bank on the Isle of Grain. The new storage tanks have nickel-something—I cannot remember the name—inside, Another way is just to tell everybody to go nowhere with pre-stressed concrete outside and a reinforced near it. The geography suggests that we cannot do concrete roof. They are a bit like a German bunker in that. Monitoring of the ship has to be more exact and many ways, so I am not certain that they would be too there must be some form of intervention policy. I badly affected. However, I know that only a few weeks rather doubt that with a comparatively small charge ago a new rail service started up to carry aviation fuel you could detonate something under several metres of from there to Heathrow. water, possibly silt, and inside an old decaying steel thing, but I bet somebody out there is thinking about it. Some people have proposed either moving the whole wreck, which would be well-nigh impossible, or just There is also the question of how we will know removing the munitions. The latter course has been what to do if the threat, for some other reason, becomes estimated to cost tens of millions of pounds and intense. What are the emergency plans for the metal would probably involve the evacuation of Sheerness. thing? If the plans are to evacuate thousands of people, suddenly some of the other options might become On balance and in conclusion, I tend to follow the more viable. I expect to get out of this debate an idea line of the noble Lord, Lord Patten, that we should of what the Government know and what their contingency leave well alone but continue to monitor closely the plans are. If America is still willing to take this away, is gradual degradation of the wreck. it worth saying, “Have a go,” or is the risk too much to make it acceptable? It is merely a matter of finding out 7.57 pm the options so we can have another think about it. If we do not know we will carrying on talking about it. Lord Addington (LD): My Lords, I was attracted to this debate for the simple reason that munitions that We heard about the worst-case scenario at the have been lying around from previous conflicts are beginning. How real do people think that is? A tsunami something virtually everybody here has grown up with would make an awfully good television programme. to some extent. Internationally, we get off fairly lightly. What are the real chances under the assessment? Who The Library briefing refers to the huge amount of has done the work? That is something we need to munitions that were simply dumped off the coasts of know. Germany and Denmark because that was the safest Last, but by no means least, what is the potential and easiest thing to do when we were disarming the environmental damage of further degradation of the Germans. In northern France and Belgium, in what chemicals that leak out? We should take that into was no-man’s land, they are still taking casualties account. We know some has taken place. What would because of 100 year-old munitions. happen down there? The question we have to ask here is: what is the risk I do not think that any of us here has an answer. All involved in this huge volume of explosives being in the interventions come at some cost and at some risk. one place? If one percentage point of the smaller Can we at least know what is going on? There is lots of figure for munitions down there went off—14 tonnes worldwide research into what you do with old munitions. of explosive—that is still an enormous blast. Nobody Some of our close allies and neighbours are dealing is quite sure what effect it would have, because it with the same problem. What has been done? What is would depend on what else it caught, but it would still the process? What are we going to do about it? One be an enormous explosion—so the risk is enormous. thing is sure—it is not going away any time soon. Let us agree on that. Whether you are blown up a bit or a lot will not make much difference to you if you 8.03 pm are blown up, to be perfectly honest. What are we doing to assess the risk of these types of munitions? Lord Rosser (Lab): My Lords, my noble friend Lord Harris of Haringey is to be congratulated on As we have already heard, phosphorus is leaking again pursuing the key questions that he has asked from them, so there is some degradation. Does that today about the wreck of the SS “Richard Montgomery” make them more stable or more volatile? It is a pretty and the threat it still potentially poses after 75 years. basic question. Is the arming system on these munitions— The wreck is designated as a “dangerous wreck” under the impact fuse, call it what you like—still active? If it Section 2 of the Protection of Wrecks Act 1973 and, is an impact type of detonation, even a comparatively consequently, regular surveys are undertaken. 1509 SS “Richard Montgomery” [LORDS] SS “Richard Montgomery” 1510

I suppose I must have gone close to it twice last difference between 1,400 tonnes and the up to 3,500 tonnes autumn on a cruise liner from Tilbury and, having left after approximately half the 7,000 tonnes on the listened to my noble friend’s speech, I am not sure that SS “Richard Montgomery” had been removed in 1944? I want to venture east from Tilbury again. My noble friend Lord Harris of Haringey raised this The official view, it seems, is to quote the background question in his opening speech, on the basis of some information from the Maritime and Coastguard Agency much more precise figures than are contained in the that is provided in the Library briefing for this debate Maritime and Coastguard Agency briefing. that, The Library briefing contains the latest survey report “the risk of a major explosion is believed to be remote”. of the SS “Richard Montgomery”, commissioned by Why is the risk “believed” to be remote when the the Maritime and Coastguard Agency. The report wreck has been designated as being dangerous under outlines the outcome of the surveys of the wreck the 1973 Act because of the amount of explosives undertaken, as I understand it, in November 2017 and remaining on board, with regular surveys needing to April 2018, and indicates that the wreck is stable be undertaken? Believed by whom? The official view is overall, with more accelerated levels of deterioration not that the risk of a major explosion is remote but in the structure since the previous survey, which I that it is believed to be remote, which is certainly not think may be as recent as 2016, limited to three out of as emphatic or definite a statement and not entirely six key areas, which have been noted in previous reassuring. surveys and which have now shown structural changes since the previous survey. What is the hard evidence about these explosives and the state they are in that justifies the view that the As far as I can see—I may be wrong—the report risk of a major explosion is believed to be remote? Is it does not comment on how much longer the structure because the wreck is deemed largely stable where it is, of the wreck is likely to remain intact and without but if that situation changed the risk would no longer significant change or on what the impact of any new be believed to be remote? Or are the munitions still on significant change might be on the remaining munitions, board deteriorating with time in such a way that there and does not address the current state of the remaining could now no longer be a major explosion if they did munitions and whether they represent a decreasing or go off? increasing hazard or risk as time goes on. Are the Government able to provide answers to these issues or Is it considered more dangerous to try to remove are they questions that are neither asked nor answered? the remaining munitions than it is to live with the situation of the wreck as it is today, with the munitions The latest survey report also indicates, as the noble on board? What would have to happen to the wreck or Lord, Lord Patten, said, that the DfT has commissioned the remaining munitions still in it to make it more some environmental monitoring around the wreck likely than “believed to be remote” that the remaining that will require the placement of scientific equipment munitions would be the cause of a major explosion? on the seabed just outside the prohibited area. What What would it cost to remove the munitions still on exactly has prompted the commissioning of this board, assuming that this is feasible? What is the cost environmental monitoring, and what is it intended to per annum of the current security and protection check or ascertain? The survey report says that the arrangements for the wreck—provided, as I understand equipment is expected to be placed on the seabed for it, by the Medway Ports Authority—and who pays the at least a 12-month period and that results are expected cost? at the end of this year. Is this still the timeframe for the What do the Government think would be the impact environmental monitoring? Finally, what was the cost on surrounding areas and on the Thames itself if the of the latest surveys undertaken in, as I understand it, remaining munitions were now destroyed in a controlled 2017 and 2018, and what is the expected cost of the explosion, and what would be the cost? If that approach environmental monitoring currently being undertaken? was to be adopted, who has the final authority to There appears to be a significant difference of view make that decision? What do the Government think between the Government, and indeed previous would be the impact on surrounding areas and on the Governments, and my noble friend Lord Harris of Thames itself if the remaining munitions blew up in Haringey, in the powerful case that he has made today, an uncontrolled explosion? My noble friend Lord Harris about the likelihood of a major explosion on the of Haringey has asked a number of specific questions wreck of the SS “Richard Montgomery” materialising. of the Government and I hope they will be able to The questions that he has posed today deserve a fully respond to at least some of them today. and considered response, backed up by supporting The SS “Richard Montgomery” had a cargo of evidence. some 7,000 tonnes of munitions, according to the Subject to what the Government might say in response, Maritime and Coastguard Agency briefing, and crossed I am concerned by the background information document the Atlantic in a convoy in August 1944, before ending from the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, which, I up on a sandbank in the Thames Estuary, where it repeat, provides the far from comforting words that, remains today. A salvage effort, as we have already heard, led to approximately half the cargo being removed “the risk of a major explosion is believed to be remote”. before the vessel flooded completely. The latest survey As my noble friend Lord Harris of Haringey said in of the wreck by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency his concluding sentence: who will take responsibility if indicates that some 1,400 tonnes of munitions remain it all goes horribly wrong? My guess is that if it all in the forward section. Where and when, then, did the went horribly wrong, it would result in one of the 2,000 tonnes or so of munitions go that make up the biggest buck-passing exercises in history. 1511 SS “Richard Montgomery” [3 JULY 2019] SS “Richard Montgomery” 1512

8.11 pm Baroness Barran: I will have to write to the noble Lord in response to that. Baroness Barran (Con): My Lords, I too begin by thanking the noble Lord, Lord Harris of Haringey, He asked about the assessment made by the Royal for securing this debate. I also thank all noble Lords Military College of Science in 1970. More recent for the fascinating contributions that we have been studies have suggested different outcomes from the privileged to hear in your Lordships’House this evening. one outlined there, but a full assessment of a mass Since I arrived here a year ago, I have never had a day detonation is difficult because of the problem of without learning something new and this evening is understanding the condition of the munitions—a point absolutely no exception. I will endeavour to cover the to which I have already alluded. He also asked about points raised, but if time does not permit me I will the 1999 risk assessment. I have been advised that write to noble Lords on any outstanding issues. there is a hard copy of it in the Libraries of both As all noble Lords have pointed out, the SS “Richard Houses. Montgomery”is very different from most World War II wrecks in UK waters. It rests in shallow water The noble Lord, Lord Rosser, asked about the basis near residentially populated areas and approximately for the Maritime and Coastguard Agency’s current 1,400 tonnes of explosive munitions remain on board. assessment of risk. The hard evidence that supports That figure is the net explosive weight, rather than the this comes from the regular surveys that we carry out net cargo weight, which is what I believe the noble and the advice over many years that the cargo is likely Lord, Lord Harris, was referring to. I think that, to be stable if left undisturbed. I stress that we always rather than the mystery disappearance of munitions, take the most cautious approach to our assessments. explains the discrepancy. A further part of our ongoing work to mitigate the We understand that much of the explosive content risk that the SS “Richard Montgomery”poses is ensuring still aboard is TNT, but we also understand that there that regular surveys are undertaken to understand the is white phosphorus on the wreck in the form of condition of the wreck and its surrounding environment. signals and smoke bombs, which are in the deep tanks, My noble friend Lord Patten stressed the importance and the surveys show no breaches. I will double-check of the use of risk-assessment data—I do not know this following the debate but my information is that we whether it is big data but it is certainly data—in our have no recorded examples of phosphorus escaping. work. The surveys are commissioned by the Maritime Several noble Lords, including the noble Lords, and Coastguard Agency and are undertaken by Lord Harris and Lord Addington, asked about the commercial offshore survey contractors. state of the munitions. Although we are not in a position to understand fully the condition of the The noble Lords, Lord Rosser and Lord Addington, munitions, we believe that the TNT is likely to be inert asked about the environmental monitoring around the because the fuses have degraded over time. I am afraid wreck. No specific environmental issue prompted the we do not have an estimate of the cost of removing the action; it was a pre-emptive move as part of our munitions, as the noble Lord, Lord Rosser requested. ongoing commitment to manage the wreck. Lord Addington: Has there been any historical study In response to a question from the noble Lord, of this type of fuse and the rate at which it deteriorates? Lord Rosser, the monitoring will also study what That is the only solid information that we could get. effect the wreck may or may not be having on its Has anything been done about that? Apparently it is a immediate environment—for example, through standard bomb so there must be other examples. measurement of the water quality around the wreck. This monitoring is ongoing and will be completed Baroness Barran: There are two answers to that later this year. question. Historically, a number of these bombs were shipped unfused, but the records are not available to As my noble friend Lord Patten mentioned, on know whether they were fused or not. In everything 3 June this year we published, on GOV.UK, the most we have done, we have made the most cautious recent surveys online for 2016 and 2017. This underlines assumptions. The other modelling that has been done our ongoing commitment to transparency in our involved testing similar explosives to see what state monitoring of the wreck. As noble Lords have noted, they would be in, but that has not been done on the these surveys confirm that the wreck of the SS “Richard explosives on board the vessel. Montgomery”remains stable but its gradual degradation The Government take their responsibility for the continues. However, as the noble Lord, Lord Greenway, wreck extremely seriously. As part of our legal duty pointed out, technology is improving all the time, under Section 2 of the Protection of Wrecks Act 1973, allowing us to understand the situation better. we have designated a prohibited area around the wreck, and it is an offence to enter this area without the written permission of the Secretary of State. The last Lord Berkeley: The noble Baroness said that the known unauthorised incursion into the area was by a report considers that the explosives pose no risk if the paddle-boarder, to whom the noble Lord, Lord Harris, wreck is stable and nothing moves. Has anyone carried referred, in 2015. out an assessment of what would happen if something hit it? It is fine having the zones around it and 24-hour Lord Harris of Haringey: If that was the most monitoring, but if a ship is going to hit it, there is recent case—if it were, that would perhaps be nothing that anyone can do about that. Has there been reassuring—how quickly were the authorities able to an assessment of what would happen if a ship did get to the paddle-boarder and remove him? hit it? 1513 SS “Richard Montgomery” [LORDS] SS “Richard Montgomery” 1514

Baroness Barran: I am not aware of whether an Forum, which includes all the first-response services. assessment has been made but I will write to the noble It is kept closely updated about the results of the Lord to confirm on that point. The noble Lord, survey and has wider plans for the safety of the area, Lord Greenway, mentioned the establishment of the of which any incident with the wreck obviously forms expert advisory group to help us to consider how best a key part. to manage the wreck in future. This was formed in The noble Lord, Lord Harris, asked about a tidal November 2017 and is made up of an independent wave that might travel up the River Thames in the chair, experts from the salvage industry and various event of a detonation. We do not believe that would be government experts with knowledge of dealing with the outcome. Rather, we believe there would be a wrecks or experience of dealing with munitions of the sudden displacement and replacement of water, which type contained in the wreck. would impact the immediate vicinity but would not An important function of the group is to provide a form a travelling wave. steer of potential options for long-term management The noble Lord also asked about incidents and of the wreck. The group is currently considering whether incursions. We have talked about the paddle-boarder monitoring and regular surveying is still the correct and the Chinese fishing boat in 2002. We believe that course of action or whether a more proactive intervention the 2012 security operation was precautionary. I have should be considered. As the noble Lord, Lord Berkeley, no record of other incidents. suggested, interventions could include the removal of With regard to conversations with the US Government, munitions or some form of containment of the wreck, the department is not sure why any offer of help was as the noble Lord, Lord Addington, mentioned. I rejected. The issue has not been discussed recently and stress that the advice I have been given is that this is responsibility sits clearly with this Government. not as straightforward as the noble Lord perhaps suggested. Toconclude,I again thank the noble Lord, Lord Harris, for bringing this debate on such an important issue On the decision-making responsibility, any decision and all those who have spoken. I hope that the measures about a change of approach to the wreck would be I have outlined in my response provide some confidence made by Ministers. We appreciate that there are no to those who live near the wreck, and to your Lordships, risk-free options, as noble Lords have pointed out, that the issue is taken with the utmost seriousness by which is why we are using the most qualified experts the Government. The SS “Richard Montgomery”remains we can find. the most surveyed and the most monitored wreck in The noble Lords, Lord Harris and Lord Addington, the country. asked about contingency planning in the event of an incident. Responsibility lies with the Kent Resilience House adjourned at 8.23 pm.

GC 93 Wild Animals in Circuses (No. 2) Bill[3 JULY 2019] Wild Animals in Circuses (No. 2) Bill GC 94

Grand Committee He was right. In my experience, when the Government rely on ethics as the basis for legislation, what they Wednesday 3 July 2019 really mean is that they cannot come up with a sound reason that can withstand any close examination. That may be slightly cynical of me, but I think it is Wild Animals in Circuses (No. 2) Bill true. Committee As the Bill is specifically targeted at the business of a “travelling circus”, it therefore needs to be clear what 3.45 pm is meant by that term. The idea that a common The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Baroness Garden meaning is to be used for the term on the basis that to of Frognal) (LD): My Lords, if there is a Division in define what a travelling circus is in law risks the the Chamber when we are sitting, the Committee will eventual Act reaching further than originally intended adjourn as soon as the Division Bells are rung and or allowing the travelling circuses to modify their resume after 10 minutes. businesses to avoid being caught under the law is, frankly, nonsense. It is an argument that my noble Clause 1: Prohibition on use of wild animals in friend the Minister advanced at Second Reading. If it travelling circuses in England had a shred of truth to it, your Lordships would not devote the hours that we do to putting definitions of terms in practically every Bill that passes through Amendment 1 this House. It just gives credence to those who might Moved by Lord Mancroft suggest that the Bill has been drafted with expediency, 1: Clause 1, page 2, line 3, at end insert— rather than thought. ““travelling circus” means— The definition I seek to include in the Bill is taken (a) a circus— from the current regulations. If it was good enough (i) which travels from place to place for the purpose of then, surely it is good enough for the Bill. It is a clear giving performances, displays or exhibitions, and and precise definition and there is no evidence that it (ii) as part of which wild animals are kept or introduced has not worked for the purposes of the regulations or (whether for the purpose of performance, display or that the two travelling circuses in England today have otherwise), and sought to remodel themselves in some way to avoid (b) any place where a wild animal associated with such having to comply. It should be noted that the Wild a circus is kept;” Animals in Travelling Circuses (Scotland) Act 2018 contains a similar, if arguably broader, definition. This Lord Mancroft (Con): My Lords, I apologise for the provides absolute clarity in life and in law as to what is fact these three short amendments are starred, which I meant by a “travelling circus”. I beg to move. know is very unhelpful to the Committee. One of the people assisting me with them was unwell over the Baroness Parminter (LD): My Lords, I heard what weekend, so I tabled them as early as I could. They are the noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, had to say about why not hugely complicated, so I do not think that that will this is a starred manuscript amendment, but given that inhibit us too much. I want to record my apologies for it is exactly the same as the amendment that was that. I am also very sorry that I was unable to speak at tabled in the Commons by Philip Davies MP, I find it Second Reading. I was detained elsewhere, but I heard somewhat surprising. I stand here representing the Liberal two or three of the speeches. I hope your Lordships Democrat Benches. My noble friend Lady Bakewell is can forgive me on that too. undergoing an operation today, so I am afraid noble I do not have a great deal of interest to declare in Lords will have to put up with me for a short while on circuses. I do not think that I have visited one for a Defra matters. very long time. I used to go to Bertram Mills Circus in We support the reasons why the amendment was London when I was a small boy. I secretly admit—and turned down in the Commons, where the Minister I know that no one will let it be known outside this made it clear that there would be guidance on these Room—that I always hoped that a lion would eat the matters. We support that guidance, which will allow lion tamer, but one never did, obviously, as it never courts the flexibility to determine these matters in a happened. That is my only interest. manner they see fit. On that basis, I wish not to support If this Bill is to become law, like all Bills it needs to the amendment and I hope that we can get through be as clear and unambiguous as possible to ensure that these amendments as quickly as possible. those who will no longer be able to trade in England by virtue of it are under no illusion or misconception that they will not be prosecuted for continuing with The Earl of Caithness (Con): My Lords, I too their hitherto lawful livelihoods. This is despite the apologise to the Committee for missing Second Reading, fact that no one has really explained why what is a as I was abroad at the time. In that debate my noble perfectly lawful business today will suddenly become friend Lord Gardiner said, criminal following the passage of the Bill into law, “I think that wild animals in circuses, whether they are trained apart from the rather dubious ethical argument, which well or not, are trained for our entertainment and amusement”.— the noble Lord, Lord Trees, who I do not think is in [Official Report, 19/6/19; col. 806.] the Committee, told your Lordships at Second Reading, When I looked at the Bill, I fully understood what he “leads us on to very contentious ground”.—[Official Report, was driving at. But I am concerned about the unintended 19/6/19; col. 796.] consequences of this, as the noble Lord, Lord Trees, GC 95 Wild Animals in Circuses (No. 2) Bill[LORDS] Wild Animals in Circuses (No. 2) Bill GC 96

[THE EARL OF CAITHNESS] Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (GP): My Lords, it was when he mentioned them at Second Reading, so I is a great pity that the noble Lords, Lord Caithness decided that I would look up what “circus” meant. My and Lord Mancroft, were not at either Second Reading vision of a circus is not necessarily what the definition or our briefing, where these issues were raised. Although of it is. A circus is defined as, many of us had the exact same concerns, we accepted “a travelling company of entertainers such as acrobats, clowns, from the Minister that the Bill is important. It has trapeze artistes, and trained animals”, been on the Tory party books since March 2012. I am or, astonished that noble Lords are trying to slay it again “a public performance given by such a company”, at this point. The amendments are neither useful nor particularly polite and I hope that the noble Lord, or, Lord Mancroft, will withdraw them. “an oval or circular arena, usually tented and surrounded by tiers of seats, in which such a performance is held”. Lord Swinfen (Con): My Lords, I did not speak at Given the advice I have received, that definition covers Second Reading. I wonder what will happen to these showgrounds. A showground moves from place to so-called wild animals, some of which have been in place; it has tiers; it is an oval; and wild animals are in circuses for a number of generations and have never it. When my noble friend the Minister deals with his been in the wild, so are completely domesticated. guidance, can he make it clear that falconry, county Originally, dogs were wolves but, after a long time, shows and such things are excluded from this provision? they became domesticated. We cannot just let them I hope he will be able to confirm this now because I out into the wild; most of them would starve. What think it was queried at Second Reading, but he never will happen to them? gave the answer. For me, it is a question of the definition. I had not seen it, other than in the advice I was given, Baroness Jones of Whitchurch (Lab): My Lords, as but it seems that this point needs to be clarified so that other noble Lords said, it is a shame that the noble we do not stray into territory that I know my noble Lords concerned were not there at Second Reading, friend does not want to get into. where Members from different Benches raised a number of these issues. I must say, we were very satisfied with the Minister’s answer. We were persuaded that the Baroness Anelay of St Johns (Con): My Lords, I definition of “circus” would be better dealt with in spoke at Second Reading and like the noble Baroness, guidance, and were pleased at his assurance that the Lady Parminter, I have read the full debates in another guidance will be available before the Bill comes into place. It is clear that this matter was fully debated effect so that circus owners’responsibilities are absolutely there, and it was right that it should be. My noble clear in advance. That precisely addressed the issue friend Lord Mancroft has raised an issue on which raised by several noble Lords this afternoon: that if we there was much exchange in another place, but it gives broaden the definition too much, it includes falconry us the opportunity today to hear reassurance from my and county shows, but if we make it too narrow, it noble friend the Minister about guidance. That is imposes a burden on circus owners when managing important, so in that respect my noble friend Lord their circuses. We were persuaded that the definition Mancroft has done the Committee a favour. that has been spelled out here would not be helpful to However, I am concerned about attempts to impose circus owners in the longer term, so we agreed on this further definitions in the Bill. This is for some of the way forward. reasons debated in another place, one of which has The noble Lord mentioned wild animals, which we already been mentioned by my noble friend Lord will come on to when we consider the other amendments. Caithness. One does not wish to see definitions used in The Bill’s purpose is to deal with wild, not domesticated, ways that are so prescriptive that they do not catch the animals; we should recognise the difference. On that people who should be covered by the Bill—those in basis, and with the assurance that I hope the Minister travelling circuses who in future should not have wild can give us once again, I hope that we can move animals—or so broad as to bring within the remit of forward. the Bill those who use falconry displays for educational services. I declare an interest, in that I have watched at TheParliamentaryUnder-Secretaryof State,Department least two of those at the Royal Horticultural Society for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Gardiner garden at Wisley, near where I live, and they were of Kimble)(Con):MyLords,mynoblefriend’samendment extremely educative not only for young people but for seeks to introduce a definition of “travelling circus” me. There is also the matter of county shows, which I into the Bill. As has been said, these matters were attended regularly when I was our Front-Bench discussed at Second Reading. My remarks may therefore spokesman on agriculture in opposition. repeat what I have already said to your Lordships. I can see the benefit of there being a definition in We chose not to provide a definition of “circus” in the Bill. I believe the Government have found one the Bill because we believe that it is better to use its which gives effect to the prohibitive provisions we wish common meaning. We believe that the same principle to have, without extending them to activities which applies to “travelling circus”. Let me expand on that. should not be covered by the Bill. I hope that my noble Wedo not believe that a definition is necessary.“Travelling friend the Minister will affirm his commitment to circus” is a commonly used and well-understood term; guidance and reassure the Committee that the current we do not think that enforcers or the courts will have definition properly delivers, as I expect it does, the problems spotting one. In fact, my noble friend changes that were received with great agreement around Lady Anelay went to the heart of the matter. I think the House at Second Reading. that my noble friend Lord Mancroft may not have GC 97 Wild Animals in Circuses (No. 2) Bill[3 JULY 2019] Wild Animals in Circuses (No. 2) Bill GC 98 envisaged the problem with providing a definition: as the former president of a county show, that I am that it could result in a definition that is too wide and well aware of the importance of this from an educational takes in other activities that we do not wish to see banned. point of view specifically. I must say, all the falconry Alternatively, it could be drawn too narrowly and displays I have been to have never been under canvas; provide operators with parameters by which to they have always been in a larger area than the one my circumnavigate the ban. A common-understanding noble friend describes. approach means that it will always be relevant. The Government feel that the amendment is neither Also, in its pre-legislative scrutiny of the Bill, the necessary nor desirable. As I said at Second Reading EFRA Committee agreed that we do not need to and earlier to the Committee, we will produce detailed define “circus”. Toassist in clarifying what the legislation Defra guidance to assist inspectors and circuses and will cover,we will drawup guidance; the noble Baronesses, set out the types of activities that we consider will and Lady Parminter and Lady Jones of Whitchurch, and will not be covered by the ban. For these reasons, I my noble friend Lady Anelay referred to this.The Scottish very much hope that my noble friend will withdraw his Government, who also chose not to define “circus” in amendment. their Act, have taken this approach, and we will take a similar one. I can confirm that we will publish guidance The Earl of Caithness: I am grateful for what my to the Bill by 20 November, two months before the ban noble friend said; I am sure that my friend, the noble comes into effect, as I said at Second Reading. Baroness, Lady Jones, will be only too pleased that it is now officially on the record. My noble friend has gone 4 pm further than he did at Second Reading, and it is much The definition provided in my noble friend’s better for it to be on the record than just said in a amendment, which states that a travelling circus is, formerly smoke-filled room. “any place where a wild animal associated with such a circus is kept”, Lord Mancroft: My Lords, I am most grateful to all would mean that a circus operator would be prevented noble Lords who took part in the debate. Although I from using their wild animals anywhere, extending the was not at Second Reading, as I said earlier, I read it Bill to activities outside the circus. The Bill has a carefully, of course, so it is not complete news to me. specific purpose: to prohibit the use of wild animals in Of course, I accept fully what the Minister says. However, travelling circuses. It is not our intention to prevent I have always thought that it is better to put things like circus operators owning wild animals or using them in this in the Bill rather than in guidance. Apart from other types of work, such as in television and film anything else, courts like clarity, and something is a production. My noble friend’s amendment would go great deal clearer in the Bill than in guidance. too far by preventing circus operators from ever using I understand too that the object of the Bill is their wild animals, and would unfairly target circus narrowly focused on travelling circuses. I still wrestle operators over other owners of wild animals. Is that with why it is so appalling to be in a travelling circus, my noble friend’s intention? I do not think so. but it is perfectly all right to own something or use it My noble friend made another point in reference for films or TV. Presumably, these animals will have to to the definition in the Welfare of Wild Animals in travel to the TV or film set, just as they do when they Travelling Circuses (England) Regulations 2012. The are travelling with a circus. I wonder if the zebus or licensing regulations did not define “circus” but had to zebras will know whether they are in a circus or part of provide a definition of travelling, as in “travelling circus”, an educational visit—I wonder whether I would know because—I emphasise this—for the purposes of licensing that. and inspection, we needed to include all areas associated Nevertheless, in the meantime, I beg leave to withdraw with a circus where a wild animal might be kept; for my amendment. example, winter quarters. There is no such issue here. Amendment 1 withdrawn. We propose not to prohibit circus operators owning these animals but to restrict their use in a travelling circus, which is the sole focus of the Bill. Amendment 2 My noble friend Lord Swinfen mentioned the welfare Moved by Lord Mancroft of the 19 animals—again, this was raised with some 2: Clause 1, page 2, line 4, leave out from “means” to end of degree of concern across the House. The operators of line 5 and insert “any animal or bird which is or (before it was both services have put on record that their animals will taken) was living wild.” either be rehomed, retired to their winter quarters or used in other work. These are trained animals; it is not Lord Mancroft: My Lords, in moving Amendment 2 uncommon for the circus industry to use its animals I will speak to Amendment 3, if it is convenient for the for TV and film work, for instance. Committee. My noble friend Lord Caithness raised the issue of The current definition of “wild animal”is unnecessary falconry. I make it absolutely clear that the legislation and unclear. The Bill seeks to replace a licensing will apply only to travelling circuses. Activities involving regime that affords safeguards for and the protection animals that will not be affected include travelling of animals in travelling circuses with an outright ban birds of prey demonstrations, wild animals performing on the use of certain species. This is not a proportionate in summer galas, television and film production work, response to interfering with a business’s right to trade. and small zoo animals going to schools for an educational The current definition fails to recognise that animals visit. These activities, for instance, and others will be in travelling circuses cannot genuinely be considered stated specifically in the guidance. I should also declare, “wild” on the basis of generations of captive breeding GC 99 Wild Animals in Circuses (No. 2) Bill[LORDS] Wild Animals in Circuses (No. 2) Bill GC 100

[LORD MANCROFT] So far as I know, none of the 19 remaining wild and close, intimate contact with humans. Some of these animals in circuses covered by this legislation were animals can be said to be no more wild than a captive-bred born in the wild but, of course, they are still wild as working dog, yet because the current definition stipulates they are not domesticated. The zebra or the snake that a wild animal is one not commonly domesticated does not suddenly become a domesticated animal just in Britain, they are caught by it. That goes against because it was born in captivity. Again, this ploy is current wildlife law, which makes it clear that as soon very similar to the one proposed by Philip Davies MP as an animal, however wild in reality, becomes captive in the other place. I hope that the Committee will in some way, it immediately benefits from the welfare reject it again in the same manner. provisions accorded to domestic animals, rather than those reserved for wild animals, which are very different. Baroness Anelay of St Johns: My Lords, yet again, I This confusion is clearly undesirable. find myself agreeing with the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler —a habit that I must try to break, but not just yet. Indeed, it also fails to recognise the domestication It is important that the Bill—it was not drafted of some animals in countries outside the UK, some of shoddily,as my noble friend Lord Mancroft mischievously which are clearly utilised in other entertainment and proposed—reflects previous discussions here and in educational industries.For example,camels are considered another place to reconcile the definition of the animals domesticated outside the UK and yet are still offered to be covered with the fact that they are not domesticated. for camel rides, polo-playing, trekking and racing in By any stretch of the imagination, being born to the UK—and not by travelling circuses. Llamas and a wild animal that has been trained and tamed in a alpacas would be in a similar position. circus does not mean that an animal will be domesticated. A better definition to recognise these issues and It is something that happens genetically over not just enable legitimate businesses to continue to trade using generations but thousands of years. My noble friend’s their existing animal stock is to modify and include sudden view that the Bill is poorly drafted neglects the the definition in the Wildlife and Countryside Act fact that it has been on the books for a long time. My 1981, which principally provides for offences concerning hair has changed colour during that period. I know damage to wildlife. It is a tried and tested definition; I that the Bill has benefited from contributions from have advanced a modified version of it in the amendment. around the House over a period of about 15 years, For clarification, the modification removes any reference during not just this Administration or the coalition to “dead” animals, making it concerned only with Government before but the Labour Government before protecting live animals. that. As the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler, said, the definition is consistent with the Zoo Licensing Act 1981; Turning to Amendment 3, given that some existing I hope that the Minister can reconfirm that and give us travelling circuses may and do display exotic bird further assurance. species, some of which are non-native to the UK, there is a clear need to comply with existing legislation, both Lord Swinfen: My Lords, I wonder what the position domestic and European, to ensure the protection of would have been for my mother. When I was a small wild birds, which is not currently the case in this rather boy, she had a pet jackdaw, which she rescued because shoddily drafted little measure. The current definition both its parents had been killed. The parents were not of “animal” in the Bill refers back to the Animal in lawful captivity when the egg was laid; they were Welfare Act 2006. However, given the need to make wild. The egg hatched, they were killed and my mother sure that a balance is struck between ensuring the rescued the young jackdaw. According to this Bill, she protection of animals and allowing travelling circuses may have broken the law. to continue trading, my amendment is aimed at ensuring Lord Judge (CB): My Lords, I apologise for not that captive-bred birds are afforded the same protection being present when the Bill first came before the as that given to them under the Wildlife and Countryside House. I will add only a few words because there is one Act 1981—protection afforded to them while they are aspect of the Bill on which the Minister deserves the still in the egg. The aim of this is to ensure that any utmost congratulations; it argues rather strongly against birds hatched from eggs taken from the wild are not the Bill being shoddy. Will your Lordships kindly exempted from the prohibition in the Bill. Travelling notice that this is just about the first Bill that we have circuses will need to ensure that any birds they display, seen in the past five years in which no regulation-making as with any other areas of the captive wild bird trade, power is invested in the Minister? The Government are born and bred in captivity. I beg to move. should be congratulated on that alone. Baroness Parminter: My Lords, I am concerned Baroness Jones of Whitchurch: I agree with a number that the amendments proposed by the noble Lord, of noble Lords that the Bill is not shoddy. Indeed, it Lord Mancroft, are dangerous and seek to drive a went through detailed and proper scrutiny both in the coach and horses—or a zebra and a transport box— Commons and here. I have absolute confidence in the through very welcome proposed legislation. way the Bill is worded. Both amendments would change the definition of I very much agree with the noble Baronesses, “wild animals” from a list of species that are not Lady Parminter and Lady Anelay. The amendments domesticated to solely animals born in the wild. The suggest that wild animals somehow become tame if current list is drawn from the Zoo Licensing Act, they are bred in captivity, but we know and all the which has worked very well for the past 30 years. I scientific evidence shows that this is not the case. It would contend that that is the tried and tested legislation takes hundreds of years of breeding to domesticate an we should look to, not that proposed by the noble Lord. animal; it cannot be done over just a few generations. GC 101 Wild Animals in Circuses (No. 2) Bill[3 JULY 2019] Wild Animals in Circuses (No. 2) Bill GC 102

In the meantime, wild animals retain their instinctive Committee that thinking these animals, wherever they natural behaviours and needs. Those behaviours do have been bred, are somehow like domesticated pets is not include doing tricks for our entertainment in a erroneous. circus. We must be wary of what the amendments Consistency between the Bill and the circus licensing propose. The British Veterinary Association states: regulations is particularly important. We have been “The welfare needs of non-domesticated, wild animals cannot clear that the licensing regulations were an interim be met within a travelling circus—in terms of housing or being measure to monitor the welfare of wild animals in able to express normal behaviour”. travelling circuses while a Bill prohibiting their use I reject the emphasis of the noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, was introduced. I think the noble Baroness, Lady Jones in the amendments; I do not agree with him. There is a of Moulsecoomb, might have said “about time”, but difference between “tame” and “wild”; in fact, I think we are now attending to the matter. The licensing that he recognises that. His own aside that he wanted regulations are due to expire on 19 January 2020. It is the lion to eat the lion tamer is the truth: people sense therefore vital that the prohibition in the Bill is enacted that these animals are wild. They were indeed wild and by then to ensure those same animals that currently there was always that danger. He would not have that require a licence from Defra can no longer be used in sense with a dog doing tricks, but lions are very travelling circuses. different. Their natural behaviour is just under the These amendments would mean that only animals surface. Although we are pleased that the lion-tamer that had been living in the wild could no longer be did not get eaten, the lion could very much have done used in travelling circuses. Of the 19 wild animals that, so it is right that they are not put in those currently under licence to be used in travelling circuses, artificial situations in future. We therefore agree with only one has ever lived in the wild—the fox, which was the original wording. rescued as a cub. These amendments would therefore allow the other 18 wild animals to continue to be used 4.15 pm in travelling circuses, following the expiration of Defra’s Baroness Anelay of St Johns: My Lords, may I current licensing regime, meaning that the monitoring apologise to the noble Baroness, Lady Parminter, who of their welfare alone would be significantly reduced. I have misnamed? It is obviously the shock of agreeing Further, these amendments could well see many with a Liberal Democrat on the record twice in an other wild animals reintroduced into travelling circuses. afternoon. I apologise to her. The majority of wild animals used in circuses around the world are not born in the wild. Many have been Lord Gardiner of Kimble: My Lords, it is wonderful bred by circuses themselves over many generations. to be able to thank the noble and learned Lord, Training a wild animal needs to begin early in that Lord Judge, for his very kind remarks. I cannot promise animal’s life. it will be the beginning of a new order, but it is rather These amendments could—again, I do not think good to celebrate those moments. I say to my noble that this is my noble friend’s intention—see tigers, friend Lord Swinfen that this legislation is to make lions and elephants return to English circuses, without provision to prohibit use of wild animals in travelling needing a licence from Defra. We cannot accept that. circuses. I do not see a connection with my noble They would also ensure that animal species we regard friend’s mother’s kindness in looking after an orphaned as domesticated could be caught by the prohibition. I bird. I do not think we can extrapolate that from this am not being facetious but I will use a stray dog as an legislation, which is specifically about travelling circuses. example; where one had been living wild, it would be I imagine that my noble friend’s mother did not have a caught by the definition of “wild animal” in these travelling circus. amendments. It is not the Government’s intention to Returning to my noble friend Lord Mancroft’s prohibit the use of dogs in travelling circuses. amendments to alter the meaning of “wild animal” It may be helpful if I use this opportunity to clarify proposed in the Bill, rather than an animal that, what is understood by the term “wild” or “non- “is not commonly domesticated in Great Britain”, domesticated” animal. Even wild animals that have the Bill would only prohibit the use of animals, including been bred and reared in captivity are still wild animals. birds, which had been living wild before being used in When providing evidence to the Scottish Parliament a travelling circus. The term “wild animal” is already during the passage of the Scottish wild animals in well established in English legislation and the Government circuses Bill, Dr Dorothy McKeegan, a senior lecturer are content that it will cover those wild animals that in animal welfare and ethics at the University of we believe should no longer be used in a travelling Glasgow, was clear that wild animals in circuses are circus. still wild animals. She said: The noble Baroness, Lady Parminter, and my noble “The domestication of animals is not just about captive breeding friend Lady Anelay were right in saying that the and sometimes hand rearing but about the behavioural and definition of “wild animal” used in the Bill is based on genetic modification of the animal away from its wild progenitor. That is not going to happen with rearing generation after generation the definitions in the Zoo Licensing Act 1981, which of animals in captivity. These are still wild animals”. has served us well, and the Welfare of Wild Animals in Travelling Circuses (England) Regulations 2012. Both Again, my noble friend Lady Anelay went to the heart pieces of legislation require wild animals to be licensed. of that. I should also say that zebras and camels will be subject I hope this makes it clear that even when wild animals, to an annual licensing inspection under the Dangerous including birds, are bred in captivity over several Wild Animals Act 1976. It is worth reminding the generations they should still be considered “wild”. GC 103 Wild Animals in Circuses (No. 2) Bill[LORDS] Wild Animals in Circuses (No. 2) Bill GC 104

[LORD GARDINER OF KIMBLE] One noble Lord, I forget who, talked about the On that basis, I am not in a position to accept my welfare issues. My noble friend made it perfectly clear noble friend’s amendments and I very much hope that at Second Reading was that there were no welfare he will not press them. issues with the 19 wild animals mentioned. Of course, if we take away the fox there are not 19 wild animals Lord Mancroft: My Lords, I have listened carefully but 18 because one of them has not become wild over to what my noble friend has had to say. The idea that generations; it is in fact a domestic animal. Zebus are the world outside is waiting for the Bill to fail so that it domesticated animals everywhere in the world. I do can reintroduce lions, tigers and elephants to travelling not know whether they are commonly domesticated in circuses is stretching things a little far. It is perfectly Britain. I suspect that it is a lonely and sole zebu; clear that whatever the Committee does today, the nevertheless, it is a domestic animal and not a wild world of travelling circuses is fading away at its own animal. rate and will be encouraged to fade a bit faster with the Bill. My father used to say that one thing you should always do is to sniff the mood of the House. My Lord Gardiner of Kimble: For the sake of the record, sniffing today tells me that my arguments have not I understand that among the considerable number of attracted overwhelming support in your Lordships’ travelling circuses there are only two which use wild Committee, so it is probably time that I beg leave to animals. This is not the end of travelling circuses and withdraw my amendment. it is important that I should clarify that, so that no other circus operator should see this as an attack on Amendment 2 withdrawn. them and their use of other animals, beyond wild Amendment 3 not moved. animals. Clause 1 agreed. Lord Mancroft: I hear what my noble friend says and would not contradict him for a moment. He Clauses 2 to 4 agreed. knows much more about this than me but I suspect that what has happened with wild animals today will Schedule agreed. undoubtedly move on to domestic animals in future, because that is the way the world is moving. I suspect, Title agreed. too, that my noble friend Lord Swinfen’s jackdaw can Bill reported without amendment. presume that it will not have a circus career when it gets old—it is probably past it by now anyway. Committee adjourned at 4.24 pm.