sign in sign up
<<
Home , Cape Wrath Lighthouse, Captain Tom Moore, Christina Rees, Gagan Mohindra, Jeremy Quin, NHS Test and Trace

Monday Volume 680 21 September 2020 No. 104

HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD)

Monday 21 September 2020 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2020 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. 603 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 604

Jeremy Quin: We are proud to support many British House of Commons companies and the entire UK defence sector. Something like £19.2 billion was given to UK companies in 2018-19 Monday 21 September 2020 to deliver on our defence needs. This has been brought out through our defence and security industrial strategy— DSIS—of which I look forward to sharing more details The House met at half-past Two o’clock with the House when it is delivered later this year. Armed Forces Capability: Future Security Threats PRAYERS Mr Gagan Mohindra (South West Hertfordshire) (Con): [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] What steps his Department is taking to ensure that Virtual participation in proceedings commenced armed forces capability is adequate to tackle future (Order, 4 June). security threats. [906250] [NB: [V] denotes a Member participating virtually.] (Beaconsfield) (Con): What steps his Department is taking to ensure that armed forces capability is adequate to tackle future security threats. [906256] Oral Answers to Questions The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr ): The Ministry of Defence is examining its capability requirements through the integrated review, guided by DEFENCE Defence Intelligence’s understanding of the threats we face now and in the future. We are examining the The Secretary of State was asked— evolving doctrines, structures and capabilities of our adversaries to ensure that we develop the capabilities Defence Helicopters: Domestic Manufacture required to deliver the operations of tomorrow.

Chris Loder (West Dorset) (Con): What steps he is Mr Mohindra: The defence industry employs tens of taking to support the domestic manufacture of defence thousands of people. Long-term investment in defence helicopters. [906249] will drive economic growth and support highly paid, highly skilled jobs, all of which is in our national The Minister for Defence Procurement (Jeremy Quin): interest. Will my right hon. Friend work with the Treasury The Department is committed to supporting UK helicopters to ensure that the defence industry is central to plans for and the defence industry more broadly. Over the next our economic recovery and that an ambitious strategy decade, we plan to spend over £180 billion on equipment is reflected in the integrated review? and equipment support, which currently includes around £10.9 billion on helicopter capability. Mr Wallace: I am always happy to work with the Treasury on any number of subjects. Defence’s Chris Loder: Many of my constituents in West Dorset multibillion-pound investment in the UK powers the work for Leonardo Helicopters in Yeovil, where skills, innovation and capabilities that keep this country redundancies have recently been announced. That is of safe, secure and competitive. As a MP, great concern to me, my constituents and those of my Mr Speaker, you will recognise how important the hon. Friend the Member for Yeovil (Mr Fysh). What is industry is to the skills base in our constituencies. the Minister doing to support the company? Defence is leading a review of the defence and security industrial strategy to identify steps to ensure a competitive Jeremy Quin: I share my hon. Friend’s concern. I am and world-class industrial base that delivers investment, pleased to reassure him that those redundancies do not employment and prosperity across the whole United relate to any changes of plan on Ministry of Defence Kingdom of Great Britain and . work, but rather to a decision taken by the company to ensure that it remains on a financially strong footing. Joy Morrissey: Following recent media reports, what We continue to work actively with Leonardo on its more can my right hon. Friend say on the role that excellent Merlin and Wildcat helicopters, and I am Defence Intelligence plays in assessing threats and our pleased to support its export drives, including earlier ability to counter them? Will he consider meeting me this month in person, in . about an issue concerning a former MOD intelligence training site in Beaconsfield? Mr Khalid Mahmood (, Perry Barr) (Lab) [V]: Will the Minister ask the Secretary of State to step MrWallace:DefenceIntelligenceusesits4,500exceptionally up to the plate and match the commitment made by the talented staff to collect, analyse and exploit intelligence. shadow Secretary of State, my right hon. Friend the By working internationally and with other Departments, Member for Wentworth and Dearne (), to it is able to judge today’s threat and tomorrow’s and procure “built in Britain”, hence ensuring that there are ensure that that feeds into the future design under the no redundancies in West Dorset, and to support the integrated review. awarding of the £1.5 billion fleet solid support vessels contract to a British consortium, to recruit and retain John Healey (Wentworth and Dearne) (Lab): May I 2,500 UK jobs,and to do so for the many other shovel-ready start by paying tribute to the forces men and women defence projects, to support British industry, British who are working to help the country through the covid workers and the British economy to lead us through this crisis? We may soon need to turn to them again, in the covid recession? face of this renewed pandemic threat. 605 Oral Answers 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Oral Answers 606

On the integrated review, I recognise that the cycle of the Labour party’s ambition on foreign policy and defence decisions does not match the cycle of political security; the previous Labour party leadership’s ambition elections. Britain still benefits from the skills, technologies for foreign policy was surrender. and capabilities at the of Labour’s Drayson review 15 years ago. The Opposition want the Government to Stewart Malcolm McDonald ( South) (SNP): get this integrated review right, but when this is the I echo the comments of the shadow Secretary of State, third Conservative review in just 10 years, how will the right hon. Member for Wentworth and Dearne the Defence Secretary avoid making the big mistakes of (John Healey), about the armed forces and the job they the last two? are doing in the current crisis. We in know all about over-ambition and Mr Wallace: The mistake of all the defence reviews— under-delivery when it comes to the Ministry of Defence, including the 1998 one, which was exceptionally good, because six years ago we were promised a frigate factory, and Lord Drayson’s review—was that they were not but that promise was broken, and we were promised matched by funding. The Labour party had exactly the 12,500 regular troops in Scotland, but the number has same problem at its last review, which is why in 2010 we never even come close to hitting 10,000. Is it not time, if inherited a black hole of billions of pounds, and indeed, we are to avoid this cycle of over-promising and under- there is a black hole now, identified by the National delivery, to move towards multi-year defence agreements Audit Office. This is not unique to any political party. that bring together the Secretary of State’s Department, Selective picking of the last two reviews, when I could the Treasury and parties in this House to prevent the probably talk about the last five, makes no difference. £13 billion equipment-plan black hole from growing The key is to ensure that our review is driven by threat. ever further? The threat defines what we need to do to keep us safe at home, and the ambition defines how far we wish to go. Mr Wallace: I hear what the hon. Gentleman says. Of All that then needs to be matched with Treasury funding. course, he may have missed the Type 31 frigate and the If we are over-ambitious, underfunded or both, we will Type 26 ships that are being made in Scotland. He may in a few years’ time end up in the position we are in have missed Faslane, although I know they do not want today and have been in the past. It has been my to talk about that in the Scottish National party. He determination to support the men and women of the may have missed the recent basing of the P-8s in Kinloss. armed forces the shadow Secretary of State talks about There will be more investment and more units placed in by making sure that we give them something we can Scotland, because we believe that the afford and tailoring our ambition to match our pocket. is the best union in this country to deliver security for all its citizens. We do not believe in separation; we do John Healey: Of course, the Labour Government not believe in putting borders between our two countries; invested in defence at a higher rate each year than that and we do not believe in trying to kid-on people in of the previous 10 years, but the Secretary of State is Scotland that they will get something for nothing with a right about the big aims and challenges. He has previously Scottish navy or Scottish armed forces. We are stronger described the 2015 review as over-ambitious and when we are together—that is the United Kingdom and underfunded, and to over-promise and under-deliver that is what will continue to invest in. There are plenty has become something of a hallmark of this Government, of troops and plenty of navy in Scotland supporting the but that most recent review left Britain with a £7 billion security of us all. black hole for military equipment; 8,000 fewer soldiers Stewart Malcolm McDonald: The Government promised than Ministers pledged as the minimum; and multibillion- 12,500 and the Secretary of State has not once come pound contracts placed abroad when we could build in close to delivering 10,000. He promised a frigate factory Britain. Of course, there is also a pandemic disease, and his Department has never come close to delivering which was confirmed as a tier 1 threat but no Government it. He must know the difference between the frigate action was taken to for it. For all the Secretary itself and the frigate factory promised under the of State’s talk of the grand picture and grand strategy, Conservative Government at the time. does he accept that the British public and the Opposition will judge the Government by these tests? Let us look at Denmark, a country that does use multi-year defence agreements. It does not have a £13.5 billion black hole in its equipment plan; it trebled Mr Wallace: I think that I misheard. I thought the its defence spending a little over one year ago. Why does shadow Secretary of State was talking about the position the Secretary of State not answer the question? We can that we inherited in 2010, which was underfunded and take the heat out of these exchanges if he takes our over-ambitious—indeed, there was an equipment hole advice and moves to multi-year defence agreements. so big that many of the tanks could be driven through Will we see that progress, as we were repeatedly told we it. He could also point out that our men and women in would, when the integrated review is published next the armed forces have been ready: they have delivered month? an excellent covid response and have not been found wanting in any way. That is partly because of the Mr Wallace: Weare going to have a multi-year integrated investment we have put into them, but also because of review that sets the course for the next few years so that expert leadership through the officers and the civil we can settle down and face tomorrow’s threat, not servants in the Department and across the Government. yesterday’s threat. Scottish National party Members I assure the shadow Secretary of State that the best always resort to “Let’s save one regiment or the other” way to avoid the pitfalls of the past is to make sure that rather than discussing what the threat could be to our ambition is matched by our pockets and what we Scotland and how they are going to deal with it. put into the review. That is fundamentally the best thing Fundamentally, all these reviews are supposed to happen we can do for all our forces. I would be delighted to hear not annually but over a number of years.The hon. Member 607 Oral Answers 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Oral Answers 608 will know that the Treasury has already talked about a Mr Wallace: Hezbollah is proscribed—the political four-year spending settlement in the next comprehensive wing as well as the military wing. Real, New and spending review for capital and a three-year settlement Continuity IRA, and all the other dissident republican for revenue, so it is based on multiple years. Instead of groups, are also proscribed. The point that the hon. arguing about the difference between a frigate factory Gentleman really highlights is that the malign activity and a systems integrator, supplier, subcontractor or of Iran has not stopped. People who think that that supply chain supporter, it would be nice if he would does not get back to us on our streets should look at recognise that in Scotstoun and Govan, and in Glenrothes that latest operation, which showed New IRA reaching and Fife alone, there are thousands of jobs linked to out in Lebanon or working with Hezbollah and other defence, many of which would not exist if Scotland actors potentially aligned to Iran to potentially inflict took a separatist path and abandoned the defence industry murder and death on these streets, either here or in and the security of these isles. Northern Ireland. We should not forget that. Old habits die hard. These people are now potentially subject to Mr Tobias Ellwood (Bournemouth East) (Con): Could judicial trial, and I cannot do anything to threaten that, the Secretary of State say when this integrated review but we should point to the facts that he highlights and will actually be published? Following the briefings this show that our adversaries link up around the world. morning in No. 10, arguably the biggest threat facing Beirut: Humanitarian Support this nation is covid-19, with cases once again rising. We must learn lessons from the first spike. It is clear that the Tom Randall (Gedling) (Con): What support his bandwidth—the capacity—of all Governments, including Department has provided to the humanitarian efforts in the UK’s, is being tested by this enduring emergency. I Beirut. [906251] have said this before and I say it again: please will he encourage greater use of our senior armed forces to The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr Ben Wallace): help to advance Whitehall’s strategic thinking, operational Within days of the explosion, Defence deployed planning and delivery, as well as the clarity of the HMS Enterprise, the first foreign ship to reach Beirut, message? They are, after all, trained for crisis management in order to survey the blast zone and share crucial data and emergency planning; let us make full use of them. on hazardous material blocking the port approaches. In addition, Defence provided targeted support for Lebanese armed forces who have been co-ordinating the humanitarian Mr Wallace: On the timing of the review, it will response. This included a field kitchen and tents for hopefully report in the autumn—in October/November 500 people, two medical cold storage containers, and a time. To ensure that our pockets match our ambitions, it team of advisers. is timed to coincide with the comprehensive spending review. Therefore, between the two, we have to make Tom Randall: I welcome the MOD’s humanitarian sure that we get the timing right. response to the disaster in Beirut, but it is important On the issue of covid and Defence, we did a fantastic that aid actually reaches the people who need it and is job in the first phase, in my view, through our men and used for the benefit of the people. For example, a women of the armed forces. We helped to thicken the donation of tea by Sri Lanka for the victims of the blast response across government by command and control, was distributed to the families of presidential guards. with senior officers and middle-ranking officers going Can my right hon. Friend tell me how he is going to in and helping people. We strengthened the logistics ensure that aid reaches the people who need it, and also supply chain in the NHS. We provided mobile testing to how important defence diplomacy has been in providing make sure that testing went to where people were rather that support? than expecting them to get in cars and go up and down motorways. Our response was excellently positioned. Mr Wallace: Defence diplomacy is incredibly important Because we were able to make that response, we have in making sure that, as my hon. Friend says, the assistance already, backed up by people like those in Defence delivered on the ground gets to where it needs to go. It is Intelligence, started planning for any second eventuality, also incredibly important in making sure we smooth the either a second wave or not a wave but an alternative way in many countries after a disaster or, indeed, just in challenge, whether that is winter pressures, floods or countries with a different system. That is why we invest Brexit. All that is ongoing. I am confident that our men in our defence diplomacy network, including our defence and women will be able to deliver, whatever demands attachés. They were first on the ground in Lebanon, and are put on government. I offer them to government on a they managed to make way for a number of our advisers, regular basis. I know that the Prime Minister is incredibly who are in place now. He is absolutely right: we need to supportive of taking up that offer when the needs fit. make sure that the aid is always targeted to the right place. The defence attaché network does just that, and it will continue to get our full support. Mr Speaker: We are going to have to speed up the answers. Veterans: Covid-19 Support Holly Mumby-Croft (Scunthorpe) (Con): What support Ian Paisley (North Antrim) (DUP): Operation Arbacia his Department has provided to veterans during the has exposed international terror links running from covid-19 outbreak. [906252] Iran to Ireland and from Hezbollah to the Real IRA. When will the Government be in a position to proscribe The Minister for Defence People and Veterans (Johnny the framework operation of that organisation—namely, Mercer): The MOD has continued to provide a full the Muslim Brotherhood—here in the United Kingdom, range of veterans support services throughout the United and when will they be able to put that organisation out Kingdom during the covid-19 pandemic. In conjunction of business? with the £6 million provided to the armed forces charity 609 Oral Answers 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Oral Answers 610 sector,the Department has helped many veterans contribute Johnny Mercer: I pay tribute to the Commando Training to the response to the pandemic through veterans Centre Royal Marines. I was down there in March, and volunteering organisations or working alongside the it really is at the cusp, as it were, of family welfare. We military contribution in the national interest. have seen under this Government a significant transition to looking after our people through a number of schemes Holly Mumby-Croft: Would my hon. Friend be able that they are benefiting from. When it comes to extra to tell me how the Ministry of Defence plans to continue support, we have moved a lot of our veterans UK to use the resources of the UK’s armed forces to help services online. We provide an extra £6 million in funding tackle the coronavirus pandemic? to the charity sector, but of course there is always more to do. Johnny Mercer: We have seen members of the armed forces working alongside our infrastructure across the : ’s fundraising was an United Kingdom, whether they have been inserted in inspiration to us all, reflecting the public’s continued local resilience forums or, indeed, the planners we stood strong support for our veterans. What additional welfare up here in London. UK defence has made a significant support is my hon. Friend’s Department providing to contribution to the national effort to defeat this virus, veterans in Havant and across the country to access and that will continue in the months ahead. vital services and to find work? Veterans Welfare Service Johnny Mercer: There is an unprecedented number of options at the moment for two things that my hon. Henry Smith (Crawley) (Con): What steps his Friend mentions. One is dealing with mental health Department is taking to provide an effective welfare challenges and other is around work. On mental health, service for veterans. [906253] we brought online earlier this year the complex treatment service, which runs alongside our transition, intervention Simon Jupp (East Devon) (Con): What steps his and liaison service. I am bringing the high intensity Department is taking to provide an effective welfare service online later this year, and when that is there, I service for veterans. [906255] am comfortable that we will have a world-class level of mental health support for our veterans. When it comes Alan Mak (Havant) (Con): What steps his Department to getting people into work, there have never been more is taking to provide an effective welfare service for initiatives. I am clear that the single biggest factor that veterans. [906257] improves the life chances of our veterans is having a job. Sarah Atherton (Wrexham) (Con): What steps his There are some extremely good examples around now, Department is taking to provide an effective welfare mirrored of course by the civil service with the guaranteed interview scheme. service for veterans. [906262]

The Minister for Defence People and Veterans (Johnny Sarah Atherton: As a veteran and a member of the Mercer): The Veterans Welfare Service continues to Defence Committee, I would like to highlight the work provide the full range of support services to veterans undertaken by female charities, particularly by Salute during the covid-19 pandemic. Her, which is part of Forward Assist. Salute Her is a unique charity that offers and provides support to all Henry Smith [V]: Last year, the Crawley armed forces three services. Does the Minister agree that, to some and veterans breakfast club was established, and I have degree, women service leavers are a hidden population enjoyed meeting it several times since then, most recently with certain unmet needs? Will the Ministry commit to on the VJ75 anniversary. What specific support can be working with me to tackle the problems faced by women provided to such grassroots groups that support our in the armed forces today? armed forces and veterans personnel? Johnny Mercer: I thank my hon. Friend for her Johnny Mercer: When LIBOR funding came to an sterling work. I also thank groups such as Forward end two years ago, it was replaced by something called Assist for their work on this. I am clear that there are the Armed Forces Covenant Fund Trust. It is administered some very good veterans provisions in this country, but in a professional way, and all charities and such grassroots there are areas where we need to do a lot better. For organisations can now bid into it for grants. I am happy example, the experiences of many females who serve are to write to my hon. Friend with details of how we can still not what I would like them to be and similarly with pass that on to support the great work that those in females who leave. I would be delighted to meet my hon. Crawley do at their breakfast clubs. Friend to continue my work with Forward Assist. I have seen the work that it has done recently. We are absolutely Simon Jupp: I would like to thank the Minister for his determined to make this the best country in the world in response. I am sure he will join me in welcoming the which to be an armed forces veteran—both for females Royal Marines family centre at Lympstone, due to open and males—and we are determined to continue our in October, which will support serving Royal Marines, work on this. veterans and their families. The Commando Training Centre is a source of enormous pride for East Devon Mrs Sharon Hodgson (Washington and Sunderland and the many former Marines who live nearby. Could West) (Lab) [V]: The Wigston review of inappropriate the Minister outline what further support the Government behaviours was published in July 2019 and estimated have provided during the pandemic, particularly for that it would take from five to 10 years to make a those experiencing exacerbated challenges due to lockdown measurable difference. Why then is a review taking measures, such as mental ill health and alcohol addiction? place of the Wigston review that was published just 611 Oral Answers 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Oral Answers 612 over a year ago? Why are charities, community interest answer, what steps is the Department taking to ensure companies and external stakeholders excluded from that every veteran, all serving personnel and every this review of a review? service family member receive the support they need during this very difficult time? Johnny Mercer: The reason we are doing that is very clear. I am aware that, within Government, we are very Johnny Mercer: I am acutely aware of the challenges good at doing reviews, but seeing the impact of those around the denudation of the third sector at this time reviews in the real world is something else. What I have and the other challenges it faces. I have talked about the asked to do with the Wigston review is to find out where veterans mental health care programme, and it is worth we are with it one year on. The review was not for mentioning as well that we are looking to launch a external organisations; it was an internal report that strategy with the NHS later this year that clearly highlights addressed some serious shortcomings. This review is a care pathway for service personnel and their families very clearly shining a light on the Department, showing as they go through life: before they join, when they are where we are doing well and where we are doing not so serving and, crucially, what to expect afterwards, so it is well, and I would be more than happy to share that with a seamless pathway that both veterans and their families the hon. Lady. and service personnel can understand, but also that I can use to hold the NHS to account. It provides some Julie Elliott (Sunderland Central) (Lab): I believe wonderful services and I am determined to make sure that Sunderland recruits more people into the Army that continues. than any other city in the country, so consequently has a lot more issues and high demand for services to Ms Marie Rimmer (St Helens South and Whiston) veterans. Will the Minister join me in thanking the (Lab): Wesley McDonnell, a 35-year-old veteran, decided excellent work of Veterans in Crisis in Sunderland, to take his own life in the park opposite my home. This which does incredibly important work in this area? Will brave man served and defended our nation for almost the Government pledge to look at providing more financial 20 years and, sadly, there are still many others like him. support from central Government for services to veterans? Can the Minister please commit to further improve the spirit of the armed forces covenant by tasking the Johnny Mercer: I pay tribute to Sunderland for the MOD to develop a health and wellbeing pathway,including extraordinary commitment that it has made to this the assessment, diagnosis and commissioning of the nation’s defence. We are undoubtedly going through a mental health needs of our brave men and women prior transition at this time in terms of veterans’ care. For too to discharge so that they have the treatment ready? long we have over-relied on the third sector, and that responsibility is slowly shifting towards the state. I am Johnny Mercer: I thank the hon. Lady for her question comfortable that we are meeting that demand at the and let me be absolutely clear on veteran suicide: any moment, but it is a dynamic process and I am more veteran suicide is a tragedy for the individual and for than happy to meet the hon. Lady to discuss the case in their family, but also for us as an institution. We want her constituency. people to go away from their time in service enhanced, not damaged, by it. We have got a job of work to do, Catherine West (Hornsey and Wood Green) (Lab): In and we have made significant progress over the past few January this year, the Minister promised to meet Combat years; by January, for example, mandatory mental health Stress and other organisations to assist with their funding training will be delivered in every unit on an annual that had been cut. What extra assessment has he made basis—that has never happened before. Through that, since the start of covid on the risks of serious mental alongside a lot of our work with the Royal Foundation, health problems among our veterans? we are changing the environment in which we find ourselves in delivering mental healthcare, resilience and Johnny Mercer: I thank the hon. Lady for her interest fitness for our people. There is always more to do, but, in this matter. I speak with the service charities on an working with partners, I am determined we will get almost daily basis, and, as I said in my previous answer, there. there is no doubt that, when it comes to veterans’ care, a Hybrid and Cyber-enabled Threats: Covid-19 shift is going on in this country at the moment from an over-reliance on the third sector to the state stepping up David Linden (Glasgow East) (SNP): What recent and assuming that responsibility, which is what I wanted. assessment he has made of the UK’s ability to tackle (a) Wehave the transition liaison programme and the complex hybrid and (b) cyber-enabled threats in the context of treatment service. There is a very small cohort of people the covid-19 outbreak. [906258] who require a high-intensity service that will come on line later this year. I am absolutely determined to ensure The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr Ben Wallace): that those three streams, as a pathway, are world leaders The MOD is developing protective measures to rebut, in veterans’ mental health care. I am monitoring the contest and respond to foreign hostile state activity figures coming in on a daily basis. We are doing pretty against UK interests at home and abroad. We continue well on meeting our timelines, but obviously there is to work with others in Her Majesty’s Government, always more work to do. including the National Cyber Security Centre, to ensure a fused approach. We take the threat seriously, as Alex Davies-Jones (Pontypridd) (Lab): In June, the demonstrated by the £1.9 billion of cyber spending Office for National Statistics reported that almost one announced alongside the national cyber security strategy. in five adults is likely to be experiencing some form of depression during the covid-19 pandemic. Given that David Linden: A second wave of coronavirus could be service and veterans charities have reported an increase accompanied by a second wave of covid-19 disinformation, in demand since lockdown, and building on the previous which, if not properly dealt with, could lead to an 613 Oral Answers 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Oral Answers 614 impact on the uptake in vaccine and ultimately endanger Government Procurement: Covid-19 life. What steps are the Government taking to improve the UK’s preparedness against further disinformation Mr Marcus Fysh (Yeovil) (Con): What steps his and are they co-operating with online platforms to curb Department has taken to support Government procurement the distribution of this material in such circumstances? during the covid-19 outbreak. [906260] Mr Wallace: The Government take disinformation The Minister for Defence Procurement (Jeremy Quin): incredibly seriously; that is to say that we focus on Throughout the pandemic, orders have continued to be disinformation, not misinformation. Disinformation is deliberately laid, often by hostile states, to subvert us or made and placed and suppliers paid. The MOD has to undermine our policy. It is, however, a difficult subject date paid £123 million in interim payments to ensure to deal with given how it often uses its agents to deliver that critical defence outputs can continue uninterrupted, that into the mainstream, or indeed through the deep and engaged directly with 600 of its critical suppliers. In web and into the surface web. That is a challenge; it is addition, as part of the Treasury fiscal stimulus programme, not easy for either local government or national an additional £200 million of funding has been allocated Government, and I am sure that the to improve the defence estate accommodation. find that similarly challenging. Where we find there to be disinformation, we will of course use all measures Mr Fysh [V]: Short-term support is great, but companies that we can to ensure that it is disrupted or that it is such as Leonardo in my constituency need long-term pointed out to the audience that it is disinformation. certainty on programmes as they fight back from covid. However, I must be very clear that it is not for us to take What can the Minister do to provide such certainty? a view on mainstream media, or on any other type of media’s slant on Government policy. That is the freedom Jeremy Quin: My hon. Friend is a great advocate for of the press that we enjoy and we are here to protect. Leonardo and for military helicopters. The publication of the integrated review and, in particular, the defence Armed Forces: Recruitment and Retention and security industrial strategy will provide a great deal of certainty. In addition, in the case of Leonardo, (Broadland) (Con): What steps his through our strategic partnering arrangement we are Department is taking to (a) recruit and (b) retain armed establishing a joint working group to support future forces personnel. [906259] capability and understanding. The Minister for the Armed Forces (): Private and Mercenary Military Forces During the 2019-20 recruiting year the armed forces hit 93% of our inflow target despite covid disrupting the Alicia Kearns (Rutland and Melton) (Con): What end of the year; recruitment was, however, 31% up from recent assessment he has made of the level of threat of 2018-19. While the armed forces are doing excellent private and mercenary military forces to (a) the UK and work to continue that success, covid has had an initial (b) the UK’s allies. [906261] impact on training throughflow this year. In the short term, therefore, we expect to see lower throughflow, but The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr Ben Wallace): early signs are that this will be mitigated by improved The Department keeps all threats to the UK and its retention and, very encouragingly,a good flow of rejoiners. allies under regular review, including those from private and mercenary forces. Jerome Mayhew: As a response to covid, we have seen the unemployment figures start to rise, and that is Alicia Kearns [V]: My right hon. Friend will agree particularly reflected in the 18 to 24-year-old demographic. that many of our adversaries deploy mercenaries and Do the Government agree that this is an opportunity to private contractors as cartels to achieve their nefarious recruit, and perhaps even to meet our full-time trained goals around the world, particularly in Libya, where the requirement for the first time since the year 2000? Does Wagner group acts as a proxy for the Russian state. the Minister agree that a career in the armed forces What steps are being taken in the integrated review, and represents an excellent career life choice, and that now also multilaterally, to assess and combat this threat? is a better time than ever to sign up? James Heappey: Emphatically, yes. Mr Wallace: Our adversaries’ use of mercenaries and proxies is growing and undermining stability in the Stephen Morgan (Portsmouth South) (Lab): The middle east, north Africa and more widely. It is not just Secretary of State recently said that Russia’s widely reported use of the Wagner proxy military “the greatest asset we have is not our tanks or our aeroplanes, it’s group in Libya, which of course we condemn, that is people.” causing this instability. We see other actors such as Iran Yet under the last 10 years of Conservative Government, behaving in this way. The UK condemns all destabilising the numbers of personnel in each of the tri-services mercenary and proxy military activity. I am afraid I have declined. With this in mind, will the Minister make cannot comment on the individual actions we take to it a priority under the integrated review to address the counter this threat, as to do so would prejudice their failure to maintain the strength of our armed forces? effectiveness. James Heappey: The hon. Gentleman tempts me to Overseas Territories: Covid-19 Support pre-empt the decisions of the Prime Minister and the integrated review.However,I can assure him that recruiting (Hertford and Stortford) (Con): What targets remain as they were, and that while the sun is support his Department has provided to the overseas shining we will be making hay. territories during the covid-19 pandemic. [906263] 615 Oral Answers 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Oral Answers 616

The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr Ben Wallace): that we get the good jobs and skills that we desperately Since the start of the pandemic, Defence has provided a need around the UK and ensure that the science base is range of support to Gibraltar, the Falkland Islands, strong and able to compete post Brexit. Ascension, Saint Helena and our overseas territories in the Caribbean. HMS and RFA Argus remain Margaret Ferrier: The current Government’s adoption in theatre and are standing by to provide logistical and of a “no comment” policy prevents any parliamentary medical support, whether in relation to covid-19 or to scrutiny of the role of UK special forces in defence and providing disaster relief during the hurricane season. security strategy,even when their involvement in operations becomes the subject of media coverage. Will the Secretary Julie Marson: Afghan interpreters have provided an of State commit to a review of the “no comment” invaluable service to our armed forces, saving the lives policy for UK special forces, and enable parliamentary of many British soldiers. Will my right hon. Friend oversight of their activities, placing them on a similar update the House on the Government’s progress on footing to MI5, MI6 and GCHQ? their commitments to the Afghan interpreters? Mr Wallace: As I say, it is a long-held policy of many Mr Wallace: The Home Secretary and I announced Governments not to comment on special forces. They at the weekend that the criteria for interpreters to are accountable to me and to the law, and where we see relocate to the UK will be expanded to include those any issues, Ministers will of course intervene. I will not who resigned on or after 1 May 2006 with 18 months or commit to a further review; that is a longstanding more service on the frontline in Helmand, so that more policy. Our special forces do an absolutely amazing job may come with their families to build a new life in the saving lives around the world and protecting our citizens. UK. In addition, the Home Secretary and I committed They operate in the covert world to achieve that effect to look even further at those criteria, and to look at and make sure their lives are not put at risk. where people suffer intimidation, to see whether those thresholds are in the right place as the peace deal Army Reserves: Covid-19 progresses in Afghanistan. Standing by these people is an honourable thing to do. They helped to keep our men and women safe, and this is long overdue. Dr Kieran Mullan (Crewe and Nantwich) (Con): What support the Army reserves have provided in tackling the Special Forces: Independent Oversight covid-19 pandemic. [906265]

Dave Doogan (Angus) (SNP): If he will make an The Minister for the Armed Forces (James Heappey): assessment of the potential merits of establishing an Some 1,800 Army reserves were mobilised as part of independent body to oversee the operations of the UK’s , the MOD’s contribution to the Special Forces. [906264] covid response. From distributing personal protective equipment in the NHS to delivering mobile testing Margaret Ferrier (Rutherglen and Hamilton West) units and helping build the Nightingale hospitals, our (SNP): If he will make an assessment of the potential fantastic reservists and the unique skills that they bring merits of establishing an independent body to oversee have been invaluable in helping the country manage the the operations of the UK’s Special Forces. [906283] covid pandemic.

The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr Ben Wallace): Dr Mullan: I want to begin by thanking my constituent It has been the longstanding position of successive Josh Grant and others from Crewe and Nantwich who Governments not to comment on the operations activity were mobilised as part of the Mercian regiment and of the UK special forces, as to do so would put personnel were willing to step up and help our country at a time of and operations at risk. All military operations are overseen crisis. What can we learn from the use of remote and scrutinised by Ministers, who are accountable to mobilisation as part of our efforts, and what more can this Parliament. we do to support employers and reservists whose Dave Doogan: Special forces deserve the very best deployment time is reduced from what they have already technological support. Swedish technology company agreed with their employers? Saab announced in July that it intends to establish a centre in the UK for forward combat air systems. The James Heappey: I join my hon. Friend in paying optimal location for that facility is in east-central Scotland, tribute to his constituent, and I thank him for his where Saab can benefit not only from clustering with service. As my hon. Friend will appreciate, there is a leading industrial partners, such as Leonardo, Babcock balance between making the reserve as easily deployable and Raytheon, but from our world-class universities as possible and reservists’ not unreasonable expectation and more widely with BAE and Thales in Glasgow. to have some certainty about the duration of their What steps will the Secretary of State take to work with mobilisation. My fantastic predecessor has now accessorised Saab to help it establish in Scotland? some ermine with his combats. Lord Brigadier Lancaster will be conducting a reserve forces review over the Mr Wallace: An interesting angle for special forces. I coming months, in which exactly these sorts of issues am not sure we are going to put a special forces base in will receive his attention. Angus. We absolutely want the best technology. We recognise that international partners can also bring that Veterans: Vexatious Claims technology, and when we work together in partnership, recognising that British prosperity is as important as Mark Pawsey (Rugby) (Con): What steps his Department anything else, we can get a good result for our forces, is taking to protect veterans from vexatious claims. who get the best kit. It is also good for our economy, so [906266] 617 Oral Answers 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Oral Answers 618

The Minister for Defence People and Veterans (Johnny Mr Wallace: I am grateful to the Rolls-Royce workforce Mercer): We rightly expect the highest standards of our for their important support for defence and, indeed, service personnel, and we also owe them justice and during the covid outbreak. The Winsford distributed fairness. We have introduced the Overseas Operations generation systems plant provides crucial capabilities to (Service Personnel and Veterans) Bill to tackle vexatious our armed forces. I am impressed by the company’s claims and end the cycle of reinvestigations of our innovative solutions to the challenges we face, for example armed forces personnel and veterans. The Second Reading on sustainability. It is an excellent example of UK of the Bill will be on Wednesday, and I look forward to engineering and of high-quality jobs. I look forward to the House’s support. seeing Rolls-Royce developing its private and public sector customer base. Mark Pawsey: Just as the Government launched their consultation on the Bill, my constituent who had served John Healey (Wentworth and Dearne) (Lab): The in the armed forces came to see me. He was concerned House is grateful to the Secretary of State for his to ensure that no service personnel or veterans should impromptu statement. I wonder whether he could place be prosecuted for carrying out what they had been the terms of reference for the Tom Kelly review in the trained for. Can the Minister provide him with that House of Commons Library.Can he confirm this afternoon reassurance? when he expects that review to be completed? Just 79 people were invited to yesterday’s battle of Johnny Mercer: I can categorically guarantee and Britain commemoration inside ,rather assure all service personnel that, should they operate than the 2,200 planned. Remembrance Day ceremonies within the law, which is very clear and well understood, in seven weeks’ time are unthinkable without so many this Government will move beyond the warm words of of those who have served in our armed forces. Will the so many before them and actually legislate to ensure Secretary of State say what special guidance he will give that they are protected from the vexatious and industrial to make sure ceremonies at cenotaphs across the country nature of the claims of the past few years. We are very can go ahead safely and respectfully? clear, however, that uniform is no hiding place for those who cannot operate within the boundaries we ask them Mr Wallace: On the first point from the shadow to operate in. The Bill is proportionate and fair in that Defence Secretary, I will of course let him know and respect. put in the Library of the House the terms of reference for the review and when we expect it to be completed. Topical Questions On remembrance, the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport is the lead. However, as the right hon. [906309] Edward Timpson (Eddisbury) (Con): If he will Gentleman knows, it is an incredibly important for our make a statement on his departmental responsibilities. Department and our men and women in the armed forces to contribute to it. I am working with the DDCMS The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr Ben Wallace): to make sure we get that guidance. He is right to I would like to make a statement to the House on recent highlight the issue and I thank him for doing so. Of reports regarding an approach taken by my Department course, some in the veterans community are the most with a media outlet. Managing information is challenging, elderly and vulnerable at present, and we have to ensure particularly where hostile states use disinformation to that whatever we do we protect them in services of subvert our security interests and our policymaking. As remembrance. I took part in VE Day by ringing a the House will be aware, all Government media and number of veterans who could not attend those events. communication professionals must abide by the Talking to numerous second world war veterans is quite Government Communication Service’spropriety guidance a moving experience. One raised a problem about being and the civil service code. The Ministry of Defence is no able to get to an optician and it was useful to ring his different. However, I have been deeply concerned that local regimental association to try to get him that help. those standards are alleged not always to have been met The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to highlight in the Department. I am treating the allegation with the this issue. As soon as we have worked out the plans, I utmost seriousness. The Ministry of Defence I lead will will share them with the House. treat outlets with fairness and impartiality. I am today writing to Defence communicators across the MOD Mr Speaker: We have with clearance and all services to emphasise that point. I have therefore to land a question. asked former director general and communications professional Tom Kelly to lead an independent review [906310] Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con) [V]: What to look into the allegations that have been made and else for Defence questions, Mr Speaker? establish what underlies them. I will report back to the My right hon. Friend has previously referred to Iran’s House once the review has been concluded. nefarious use of power via the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, including Hezbollah and the harassment Edward Timpson: The Rolls-Royce distributed generation of UK shipping in the strait of Hormuz. Does he agree systems plant in Winsford provides mission-critical power that unless its influence is curtailed, the IRGC will generation for our armed forces and is now expanding continue to be a major threat to the safety and security into other sectors, including the rail industry, to help to of British forces, and will he address that in the upcoming maintain its 50 highly skilled jobs, as well as another integrated review? 100 across the supply chain. Will my right hon. Friend congratulate the Rolls-Royce workforce on their sterling Mr Wallace: My hon. Friend is absolutely right to support of our defence capability, as well as perhaps point out the malign activity of the Iran state in using recommending their services to other Government both proxies and, indeed, the IRGC directly either to Departments? harass shipping going about its lawful business or to 619 Oral Answers 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Oral Answers 620 enable terrorist groups in the region. It does not help Jeremy Quin: As the hon. Gentleman knows, although any of the peace we seek in that region; nor does it help that road runs through MOD land, it is an adopted Iran to join the table of civilised nations, which it road. Having said that, MOD contractors have filled in aspires to join. The IR will look exactly at those things—at potholes and cleared ditches and culverts, and we will threat; defined around threat—whether that is Iranian see what we can do. I am more than happy to meet the malign activity, Russian activity on Europe’s borders or, hon. Gentleman. indeed, terrorist threats around the world. It is important that that leads the review. That is what I have committed [906313] David Simmonds (Ruislip, Northwood and to, and right in the middle of that will be Iran and Pinner) (Con): Potholes are on the minds of my the IRGC. constituents, but they are not what I have in mind when I ask this question. Will my right hon. Friend give [906312] (Gower) (Lab) [V]: My an update on the support that his Department has constituent David is currently serving in the Army. His provided to the civil authorities in London in dealing brother Dan served for 12 years, fighting in Iraq and with the covid outbreak? Afghanistan, but last year Dan killed himself. David The Minister for the Armed Forces (James Heappey): wrote to me about the lack of support that Dan had Where to begin? Specialist personnel such as engineers, received while he was serving, and said that the Army medical clinicians, logistics planners, advisers, and general really does wash its hands of former soldiers once they duty soldiers and drivers have carried out a variety of have left. I have heard the Minister lay out mental tasks to help tackle the covid-19 outbreak in London. health support plans for the future, but David has They have distributed personal protective equipment; written twice to the Ministry of Defence about this critical care transfer teams for the London ambulance situation, and only an email from my office has been service have assisted in the movement of patients; and replied to, nine months after the first correspondence. they have driven ventilators around London, as well as Is this really the way we should treat our military helping with testing. Finally, they helped build the personnel? amazing first Nightingale hospital at the ExCeL.

The Minister for Defence People and Veterans (Johnny [906315] Afzal Khan (Manchester, Gorton) (Lab) [V]: Mercer): On unanswered communications, I will have The GMB union estimates that by placing the Fleet an investigation into that this afternoon, but look, there Solid Support order with UK shipyards, the Treasury has never been more help available for veterans and could see up to £285 million of the £800 million contract service personnel. Each individual suicide is a tragedy, returned in taxes. The award of the contract could have and each one I take personally, but we have to be very long-term benefits for the shipbuilding sector and the careful about consistently driving home this narrative wider economy, giving companies the confidence to that there is no help available. Should we make it easier train new apprentices and plan for the future. Will the to access? Should we have better care pathways? Of Government support GMB’s call for the FSS order to course, but the reality is that there is help available and be placed in UK shipyards? people must speak out. Mr Wallace: We have already started a market [906311] Mark Menzies (Fylde) (Con) [V]: As you are engagement exercise and have had a healthy response. well aware, Mr Speaker, BAE Systems plays an integral I intend to announce the procurement timetable for the role in the economy of Lancashire. May I ask the warships in due course, after market testing has completed. Secretary of State to continue to push for an integrated We intend to encourage international partners to work approach to acquisition in the air sector so that the alongside UK firms for the bid, which will build on the groundbreaking work on Tempest, which is vital for success of Type 31. the UK to retain its sovereign freedom of action, is at the core of future plans for our outstanding Royal Air [906316] Mrs (Meon Valley) (Con): Force? Will the Minister update us on the progress of the digitisation of Veterans UK? The Minister for Defence Procurement (Jeremy Quin): Johnny Mercer: I am delighted to update my hon. My hon. Friend is absolutely right that the RAF must Friend. Six months ago we signed a £25 million contract have the very best capabilities to meet future threats. to digitise all the services that Veterans UK provides. I This is naturally a focus of the integrated review, and I am clear that too many of our people have a poor can assure him that Lancashire’s critical role in combat experience, and the people in Veterans UK have to work air, and the skills it represents, are very much recognised in very difficult conditions with lots of paper records and understood. and so on. We are putting a lot of money into digitising that, and the experience will be replicated in an application [906314] Jamie Stone (Caithness, and Easter that people can download to their smartphones, and Ross) (LD): The Ministry of Defence has a live firing vets care will be in the hands of every veteran in the range near in the north-west of my United Kingdom. constituency. Running through the firing range is a road, which, when the military is not using the range, is [906317] Dr Lisa Cameron (East Kilbride, Strathaven popular with visitors and locals alike, particularly and Lesmahagow) (SNP): I must first declare an interest, because Cape Wrath , at the top left-hand as my husband is a veteran and South Lanarkshire corner of our country, is one of the great destinations Council’s veterans champion. The council has been of the United Kingdom. The road is in bad nick. doing fantastic work and has now agreed cross-party to Would the Ministry of Defence be willing to put its implement a guaranteed interview scheme for veterans, hand in its pocket to help get the road done up? as many find it very difficult to gain employment after 621 Oral Answers 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Oral Answers 622 leaving the forces. Is that positive development something James Heappey: I absolutely would. Hansard will that the Veterans Minister could take forward with show an earlier pitch for joining the regular armed local authorities—indeed, all levels of government across forces, and now it will show a pitch for joining the the UK, including potentially this House—to ensure reserve armed forces. Over the last few months, we have that there is a guaranteed interview scheme for veterans? needed all the skills and experience that our reservists bring, and as the integrated review seeks to draw ever Johnny Mercer: I thank the hon. Lady for her continued more on the expertise of those serving in the reserve as work on this issue. I am clear that getting veterans into we expand our capability into new domains, now is a employment is the single biggest factor that improves great time for someone to go down to their local reserve their life chances when they leave. We now have a centre and join. system that is light years away from where it used to be. We can always do more. We are bringing in another [906336] Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Slough) (Lab): manifesto pledge to ensure that there is a guaranteed The Secretary of State recently stated that the Ministry interview scheme for veterans in the civil service, and I of Defence’s greatest asset was not tanks or aeroplanes, am always open to ideas to expand that where we can. but its people. However, over the last decade, the Conservative Government have proceeded to make huge [906318] Holly Mumby-Croft (Scunthorpe) (Con): cuts to the level of armed forces personnel, and there Earlier this year, I met councillors and residents in has been a corresponding decrease in morale within the Kirton Lindsey who want to repurpose Vincent hall armed forces, going down from 60% in 2010 to 45% in as a community gym. The Department has been 2020, so will the Secretary of State commit to finally incredibly helpful so far. Will it continue to work with putting a stop to these cuts to our brave armed forces? me to bring forward that excellent plan? Mr Wallace: The hon. Member is wrong to make a Jeremy Quin: My hon. Friend is a great advocate for connection between morale and numbers in that way. In her constituents. We have recently received a bid from my experience, and with the soldiers and sailors I have the council for that asset of community value and will been meeting recently, morale is high. In my experience be contacting it to discuss the offer and the value it in serving, morale is mainly about when someone is would deliver for taxpayers. used to do things usefully and when they are there on operations. He may like to reflect on the operational [906331] (Warley) (Lab): May I press the decline currently of our activity in our forces, which Secretary of State further on the Fleet Solid Support may well have some effect on morale. ships? Back in July in reply to my right hon. Friend the On the issue of numbers, it is important not to reduce Member for North Durham (Mr Jones), he said that any armed forces debate to numbers alone. We need the “such ships are not highly complex, so once the competition size of the armed forces to be fit to meet the threat. It happens and it is placed, I do not think it will take long to build may be more. It may be less, but the key thing is to make them…British shipbuilding and British yards produce some of sure we meet the threat and invest in those men and the best ships in the world and we should support them as best as women we have who are serving. we can and ensure our navy gets some great British-made kit.”— [Official Report, 6 July 2020; Vol. 678, c. 660.] [906321] (Ipswich) (Con): I have recently As EU regulations are no longer the excuse—if they spoken with the founder of the Combat2Coffee project ever really were the reason—why will the Secretary of in Ipswich, which does vital work supporting local State not commit today not only to build those ships in veterans’ wellbeing. One of the key issues that he and British yards, but to get a move on? other veterans are facing is the bureaucratic and sometimes distressing health assessments that they Mr Wallace: The right hon. Gentleman will know have to go through to get the pensions and benefits that that one of the challenges for our yards is not that they they are entitled to. Will my hon. Friend look at cannot make ships: it is simply that there is feast and streamlining this process to make sure that veterans famine. Sometimes we go from a pipeline that is full to a living with challenges such as PTSD are not put off pipeline that is empty, and it is incredibly important accessing the support they deserve? that we schedule our shipbuilding to make sure we keep as much productivity and throughput in our yards as Johnny Mercer: I pay tribute to the men and women possible. On the point of the Fleet Solid Support ship, who work at Veterans UK. They have been working with as I have said, we have started discussions and the historical records—paper records—for a long time. It competition will be issued. He will know that the previous could be a fairly unloved part of what the Government competition was stopped. I am keen to make sure that do. We are completely changing that and digitising all we get it right for our , and the right hon. these records. It is our ambition that veterans’ care is in Gentleman should wait for the competition to be issued. the palm of people’s hands, on a smartphone application by the end of this Government, and we will make sure [906319] (Southampton, Itchen) (Con): that this is the best country in the world in which to be a Having served in the UK armed forces, I know what a veteran. rewarding career it can be. Covid has created many Mr Speaker: In order to allow the safe exit of hon. challenges in terms of not just health, but the hit on the Members participating in this item of business and the economy and the pressure on employment. Many people safe arrival of those participating in the next, I suspend are probably now looking at ways to supplement their the House for three minutes. income. Would my hon. Friend therefore redouble his efforts to encourage young people to consider a career 3.32 pm in our reserve forces? Sitting suspended. 623 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Covid-19 Update 624

Covid-19 Update The next line of defence is testing and . We are doing more testing per head than almost any 3.35 pm other major nation. Our daily testing capacity is now at The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care a record high of 253,521, and it continues to grow. On (): With permission, Mr Speaker, I would Thursday, we announced that two new Lighthouse labs like to make a statement on coronavirus. This deadly will be set up in Newcastle and Bracknell, increasing virus continues to advance across the world. The World capacity further. As the House knows, alongside that Health Organisation has confirmed that the number of record expansion, demand has gone up, too, so we need new cases in Europe is now higher than during the peak to prioritise the tests for those who need them most to in March. Here, the latest Office for National Statistics save lives, to protect the most vulnerable and to make figures indicate 6,000 new infections a day—almost sure that our health and care services and our schools double the previous week. can operate safely. As the chief medical officer and the chief scientific Today, we have published our list of where tests are adviser said earlier today, we are seeing a rise in cases being prioritised, setting out how we will make sure across all age groups. That pattern is emerging across tests are allocated where they are needed most: first, to the entirety of our United Kingdom. Earlier this afternoon, support acute clinical care; second, to support and the Prime Minister held discussions with the First Ministers protect people in care homes; third, NHS staff, including of the devolved Administrations and the Deputy First GPs and pharmacists; fourth, targeted testing for outbreak Minister of Northern Ireland to make sure that, wherever management and surveillance studies; fifth, testing for possible, we are united in our efforts to drive this virus teaching staff with symptoms, so we can keep schools down. and classes open; and then the general public when they We know that the epidemic is currently doubling have symptoms,prioritising those in areas of high incidence. around every seven days and that, if we continue on I want to reinforce this important point: the system that trajectory, we could see 50,000 cases a day by relies on people coming forward for tests if—and only mid-October, so there can be no doubt that this virus is if—they have symptoms of coronavirus or have been accelerating. We must all play our part in stopping the specifically advised to by a health professional. The spread. testing capacity we have is valuable and we must together I would like to update the House on decisions the prioritise it for the people who need it the most. Government have taken so far. The first line of defence The next part of our defence is local action. We have is, of course, the that every single one been vigilant in monitoring the data and putting in of us has a responsibility to follow. That includes the place targeted local measures so that we can come down basics—hands, face and space, and the rule of six—and hard on the virus wherever we see it emerging. In the a crucial part of that is people self-isolating if they are summer, when the virus was in retreat, we were able to at risk of passing on the virus. People who have tested relax some of the measures that we had put in place, but positive and their close contacts must self-isolate. That now as the virus is spreading once more we have had is the primary way that we, together, break the chains of to act. transmission. On Thursday, I updated the House on the changes we I know that self-isolation can be tough for many are making in parts of the north-east, and on Friday we people, especially if they are not in a position to work introduced new rules for parts of the north-west, West from home. I do not want anyone having to worry and the .Wehave seen some concerning about their finances while they are doing the right rates of infection in those areas. , for instance, thing, so we will introduce a new £500 isolation support now has more than 120 cases per 100,000 population, payment for people on low incomes who cannot work and in Warrington it is about 100. As a result, working because they have tested positive or who are asked to with local councils, we are putting in place stronger self-isolate by NHS Test and Trace. It will start next restrictions to protect local people. In parts of Lancashire, Monday. It will apply directly in . The UK Merseyside, Warrington and Halton, we are putting in Government will be providing funding through the place new measures from tomorrow. As with our strategy Barnett formula to the devolved Administrations so overall, our goal is to protect education and employment that similar support can be offered to people in Scotland, as much as possible, while bearing down on the virus. and Northern Ireland. Residents should not socialise with people outside their As we are strengthening our support for those who own households or support bubble. Hospitality will self-isolate, we propose to strengthen the sanctions for be restricted to table service only and operating hours those who do not. The vast majority of people who are will be restricted, so venues must close between 10 pm asked to self-isolate do, but the rules are so important and 5 am. From tomorrow in Wolverhampton, Oadby that we must ensure that nobody breaks them. We are and Wigston and the whole of Bradford, and therefore proposing a new legal duty to self-isolate, Calderdale, people should not socialise outside their again for people who test positive or who are asked to household or support bubble. do so by NHS Test and Trace. That is backed by fines of up to £10,000 for repeat offences and serious breaches. We know from experience that local action can work We will step up enforcement too. NHS Test and Trace when local communities come together to follow the will make regular checks on those who are self-isolating, rules, to tackle the virus and to keep themselves safe. I and we will crack down on employers who try to know how hard that is. We are constantly looking to prevent staff from following the rules. Over the past few how we can ensure measures bear down on the virus as months, self-isolation has been instrumental in breaking much as possible, while protecting lives and livelihoods. the chain and blunting the force of this virus. We know I have heard the concerns about the impact of local that it works. With winter ahead, we will support everyone action on childcare arrangements. For many, informal to do what is right to help stop the spread of the virus. childcare arrangements are a lifeline, without which 625 Covid-19 Update 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Covid-19 Update 626

[Matt Hancock] back to school, quite rightly. They have gone back to work. They have done what they were asked to do; in they could not do their jobs. Today, I am able to return, Ministers were supposed to fix test, trace and announce a new exemption for looking after children isolate, so that we could, in the words of his own under the age of 14 or vulnerable adults where that is Government adverts, necessary for caring purposes. That covers both formal “get back to the things we love.” and informal arrangements. It does not allow for playdates or parties, but it does mean that a consistent childcare Before the summer, the Government commissioned relationship that is vital for somebody to get to work is the Academy of Medical Sciences to scenario plan. It allowed. modelled that the R value could rise to 1.7 in September— that is what Imperial College currently estimates it to I would like to thank colleagues from across the be—and it recommended significantly expanding the House, including my right hon. Friend the Member for capacity of the test, trace and isolate programme to Berwick-upon-Tweed (Anne-Marie Trevelyan) and the cope with increasing demands over the winter. Ministers hon. Member for Sunderland Central (Julie Elliott) and were warned, but pillar 1 and pillar 2 testing capacity my hon. Friend the Member for North West Durham did not increase significantly over the summer. (Mr Holden) for working with us on this important issue. I hope the change will provide clarity and comfort In recent weeks, only half of all tests have been to many people who are living with these local restrictions. received in less than 24 hours. The Secretary of State It shows the benefit of cross-party working across the has repeated his point about asymptomatic people asking House and listening to concerns as we all do our best to for tests. Will he publish the pillar 2 data, which breaks tackle this dreadful disease together. down how many of the people asking for those tests The virus is spreading. We are at a tipping point. I set were symptomatic and how many were asymptomatic? out today the measures the Government are taking so Many parents report going to walk-in centres with their far. We are working right now on what further measures sick children when they themselves had no symptoms may be necessary, and the Prime Minister will update and being given a test. Was that a national policy and the House tomorrow with any more action that we need has that national policy been abandoned? to take. This is a moment where we, once again, must We welcome the recognition that people need financial come together to tackle this deadly disease. I commend support to isolate. We have been saying that for months, this statement to the House. but, as I understand it, it is available only to those low-paid workers who are also on benefits and not to all 3.44 pm low-paid workers, so will the Secretary of State consider expanding the eligibility criteria? (Leicester South) (Lab/Co-op): I welcome advance sight of the Secretary of State’sstatement, We have always said that when testing breaks down, and we particularly welcome the action that he has tracing breaks down and the virus gets out of control. taken on childcare. There can be no doubt that the We are now facing a second wave of infection. We do presentations that we saw today from the chief medical not want a second wave of ministerial mistakes. All of officer and the chief scientific adviser were stark and us want to avoid a further national lockdown. Lockdowns deeply concerning. The Secretary of State yesterday or circuit breaks exact a heavy social and economic described this, and he repeated it today, as a tipping price, especially on the poorest and more vulnerable, point. I agree that we are at a perilous moment. but controlling the virus and protecting the economy The exponential growth in the virus cannot be ignored. are linked objectives, not in conflict with one another. This virus takes lives, and it leaves many with long-term I understand that the Secretary of State will tell us debilitating conditions. Every reasonable action must that we have to anticipate the Prime Minister’s statement, be taken to save lives, minimise harm and keep our but can he confirm that during a lockdown, if we have children in school. That means a suppression strategy one, he will use the time wisely, expand NHS lab capacity, to drive infections down, so will the Secretary of State put public health teams in the lead on contact tracing, reject those siren voices telling him that the virus has quickly assess the university pilots on saliva testing, and lost potency or that we should let it rip through the herd validate polymerase chain reaction pool testing, so that while the vulnerable shield? when those lockdown restrictions are lifted we can We support the local restrictions that the Secretary of contain the virus in the future? State has had to impose, including in Chorley,Mr Speaker, I welcome what the Secretary of State said about and we understand why he has made that decision. prioritising NHS staff, care workers and teachers, but Neither he nor I came into politics to place upon can he clarify why he has issued guidance to hospital individuals a heavy burden of curtailments on our trusts placing restrictions on the numbers of tests that freedoms, and while we, as the official Opposition, they can carry out, and how he will protect care homes? would always welcome greater parliamentary scrutiny According to reports today, many care homes have had of the restrictions, we will continue to work constructively to wait over two weeks for their test results, and data on a cross-party basis where restrictions are necessary from shows that more than to arrest the spread of this virus. 200 care homes have had an outbreak of covid in the May I also say to the Secretary of State, ever so last two weeks. Will he ensure that no one is discharged politely of course, that the tone of his remarks yesterday into a care home without having a covid test? Given rather gave the impression that he was blaming people where the virus is, what is his advice to the shielding for breaking the rules and allowing the virus to grow? community? What protections is he putting in place for The reality is that people have done everything that they those from black, Asian and minority ethnic communities, were asked to do. They have missed birthday celebrations, given that there are disproportionate numbers from weddings and funerals. They have sent their children those communities in intensive care units today? 627 Covid-19 Update 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Covid-19 Update 628

None of us wants to see another lockdown or circuit workers and frontline staff—including, if I may say so, break, and we will of course understand if one becomes the staff at the testing centres—and that we reiterate necessary, but test, trace and isolate should have been once again our commitment to patient safety. fixed. That failure has left us vulnerable and exposed. Now we must act with speed to save lives and minimise Mr Speaker: I welcome back Philippa Whitford. harm.

Matt Hancock: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman Dr Philippa Whitford (Central Ayrshire) (SNP): Thank for his constructive approach in these difficult times. He you, Mr Speaker. As the chief medical officer and chief and I agree that the strategy of suppressing the virus scientific advisers said this morning, the UK is in danger while protecting the economy and education is the right of losing control, as we have seen happen in many one. In so doing, it is important to act fast so as not to countries in Europe. As the Secretary of State has said, have to act bigger later. I also agree that no one in this we could be facing 50,000 new cases a day by mid-October, House came into office to put in place restrictions like leading to about 200 deaths a day by mid-November. these. He asked about the importance of people following No one should be in any doubt that it is a mistake to the rules that we have put in place. It is vital that all think that the virus has changed and that it will not kill people follow the rules. The vast majority have done so people if we get back to where we were in April. throughout but, critically, enough have not, meaning I agree utterly with the Secretary of State that we that in many cases we have had to make the rules need to take action now, and that action is personal; mandatory, rather than relying on people’s sense of every single person has the responsibility to stick to the civic duty. That is the fundamental judgment behind rules—to wear a face covering, wash their hands and making self-isolation mandatory, as I announced in the keep their distance. I remind Members in this House, statement. because I have been watching it from outside, that that The hon. Gentleman asked about testing. Of course, is not always what is on show in this Chamber, and we we have record testing capacity right now—a record all have a responsibility to set an example. That 233,000 tests were done on Friday—and lab capacity responsibility extends to self-isolating, whether we have will continue to grow. He also asked about the NHS symptoms, we are proven, we are a contact or we have testing capacity, which will also continue to grow. In returned from a high-risk country. If we are meant to be fact, I had a meeting about that earlier today with isolating, we need to do it. I really welcome the fact that , the head of NHS England. The the Government are finally putting in place financial hon. Gentleman asked about pool testing and saliva support for people on low incomes, who might be testing, which are just two of the many new testing tempted not to isolate because they simply do not have capabilities that we are bringing to bear. He also asked any other opportunities to feed their family. me to ensure that there will be no admissions to care However, it is crucial that we have a fast and responsive homes without a test. That is our policy: not just no test and trace system, so I have a couple of questions for discharges from hospital into care homes without a test, the Secretary of State. In recent weeks, he has talked but no admission from anywhere into care homes without about aiming to have 500,000 tests a day by the end of a test. That was reiterated in the social care winter plan October. Given the surge we are facing, does he envisage that we set out on Friday. being able to accelerate that and bring it forward? I suppose that at the heart of the official Opposition’s Secondly, on 8 and 15 September he committed to me response, and at the heart of my response to the hon. that he would be increasing funding to expand NHS Gentleman, is the fact that we are united in wanting to testing, but, as we heard from the shadow Secretary of tackle this virus, and in sending the message to everyone State, NHS trusts in England have been told that funding across the country that it is critical that we all follow the is capped and they are not to expand covid testing. rules and play our part so that we can suppress the virus Surely this is resource that we want to use and make while protecting, as much as possible, the things that available. we love. Matt Hancock: I wholeheartedly agree with the hon. (South West Surrey) (Con): I support Lady’s comments about the need for action across the the measures outlined by the Health Secretary, which UK. We have seen in Scotland, as in England, Wales regrettably are both necessary and proportionate. Last and Northern Ireland, that the number of cases has, week, on World Patient Safety Day, the WHO announced sadly, risen sharply. I welcome her physically back to a charter for health worker protection, which asks all the Chamber, in demonstrating this unity of purpose WHO member states to commit not only to having across the four nations of the UK. If we can bring adequate supplies of personal protective equipment forward the goal of 500,000 tests per day from the end and mental health support, but to ensuring that there is of October, of course we will do so; we are pushing that zero tolerance of violence against health workers. Will as hard as we can and are on track to meet that he commit the Government to signing up to the charter commitment. As she says, that is for across the UK, so so that, as we go into a second wave, all our brave it includes the tests done by the Scottish NHS. I know frontline workers know that this Government and this that conversations have taken place between the NHS in House stand four-square behind them? Scotland and the NHS in England to work on making that happen. We are expanding NHS testing, including Matt Hancock: Yes, I will happily sign up to the the funding. In the funding letter that went out to the proposals that my right hon. Friend has set out. As the NHS for the second half of the financial year—for House well knows, his long-standing and international the cover in winter—we set out that that includes the work on patient safety is very impressive. We must commitment to support financially the testing done in ensure that in these difficult times we protect our care the NHS in England. 629 Covid-19 Update 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Covid-19 Update 630

Chris Grayling (Epsom and Ewell) (Con): I welcome Mary Kelly Foy (City of Durham) (Lab): Does the the measures my right hon. Friend has announced Secretary of State think that a £10,000 fine will act as a today, as he seems to be getting the balance absolutely disincentive to poorer people getting a test? right, and I praise him for the job he is doing. However, we have to remember that there are huge regional Matt Hancock: We have put in place the extra £500, variations in the impact of the virus at the moment and in addition to other income that people are getting, to many parts of the country have much lower infection support people on low incomes to self-isolate. If someone rates. There are huge consequences of this virus for who is on a low income has symptoms and wants to people in our communities, including on their mental know whether they have the virus, the result of having a health, and, in particular, for the younger generation, positive test is that they will get the extra £500, and then who are paying a very heavy price. Given those regional of course they have to self-isolate. I am confident that variations, may I say, in the full knowledge of the people will come forward and do not only the right pressures he is facing, that I do not believe the case for thing for society but the right thing for them, to find out further national measures has yet been made? the cause of their illness if they have symptoms. Harriett Baldwin (West Worcestershire) (Con): I thank Matt Hancock: There is an important balance between the Secretary of State for the extra £2.5 million for the measures we need to take across the country as a Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust and the whole, and the further and stronger measures in local extra money for the social care system in Worcestershire. areas. My right hon. Friend will have seen, particularly Can I clarify what the advice is these days for people in the past week, that we have expanded some of those who would normally have fetched up at A&E? Is it to local interventions to cover bigger geographies, but he is call 111 in every instance? right to say that there are some parts of the country where, thankfully, the number of cases is still very low. Matt Hancock: Yes. We are moving to a system where So the balance between what we do nationally and what the advice is to call 111 First and then go to A&E, or we do locally is as important as the balance in terms of call 999 if it is an emergency and you need an ambulance. what we do overall. That system will not only help people to be triaged for the right treatment, which may be to see a GP, go to an Munira Wilson (Twickenham) (LD): I am sure the urgent treatment centre or go to A&E. It will also help Secretary of State will agree that one of the greatest the emergency department to know that people are tragedies of the first wave of this dreadful virus was the coming. The combination of the two is critical. We are loss of life in and the impact on our social care sector, rolling this out over the next couple of months, and we and we must learn the lessons from that as we head into aim to have it in place across the country by 1 December. a second wave. While he has emphasised in the media and in his statement the prioritisation of testing in care John Cryer (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab): Despite homes, could he explain why a number of care homes what the Secretary of State has said today, we are still are still reporting a two-week delay in receiving test hearing myriad stories of people—our constituents—being results? Will he clarify whether the prioritisation also unable to get tested. The worst story I have heard is a includes staff providing care in people’s homes? constituent who was told to travel 600 miles to Aberdeen to get a test. Why is that the case, when we are constantly Matt Hancock: Care home testing is incredibly important. told by Ministers that there is no problem? We have brought down some of the response times, and I am glad to report to the House that, since last week, Matt Hancock: Nobody has addressed the problems when we debated the very sharp rise in demand, including and challenges in the testing system more than me. We among asymptomatic people, that demand has come need to resolve those problems, as we have in very large down somewhat, and the pressures are a little lower on part resolved the problem of people being sent long the testing system as a whole. That does not mean that distances. I would love to know the example that the we do not want to increase capacity further—of course hon. Gentleman cites, because I am told that that we do. It is very important that we have tests available problem in the system was fixed last week, and if there for all vulnerable people, whether they live at home or in is a more recent example, I want to know about it. a care home. Simon Fell (Barrow and Furness) (Con): I welcome my right hon. Friend’s commitment to the expanding of (Tunbridge Wells) (Con): The scientific testing, which is clearly key to identifying the virus and evidence is that covid is detectable by test within seven stopping its spread. I direct him to an article in days of someone being infected, so why should people today about private businesses expanding testing capacity. who have been made to self-isolate not be tested seven BAE in my constituency is testing almost 6,000 employees days after a possible infection and released if they test on a weekly basis and is keen to expand that into the negative? community. I know that my right hon. Friend has already started to engage on this issue, but I urge him to Matt Hancock: The incubation period before which do everything he can to cut through any red tape, the virus can present itself is still estimated to require expand such testing as quickly as possible and use every 14 days of self-isolation. If we could bring that figure tool at our disposal. down, I would be the first to be pleased to do so. As with our decision to take to 10 days the period for which Matt Hancock: Of course we support businesses and somebody who has tested positive must self-isolate, this others who want to get tests outside the NHS Test and is a critical point, and we must rely on the scientific Trace system; last week we published a paper on how evidence. If my right hon. Friend has further scientific they can go about doing that, and we encourage businesses evidence, I would be happy to look at it. to do that for their employees. The critical thing is that 631 Covid-19 Update 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Covid-19 Update 632 if people test positive, that data must, by law, flow to already started to roll out and will shortly roll out more Public Health England so that we can do the necessary broadly. Although it is not mandated this year, I can see contact tracing and enforce the isolation that is going to no good reason why somebody in the NHS should not be mandatory from next Monday. We strongly support get a flu jab, unless they have a very specific clinical that sort of action, whether it is taken by employers or, condition. We look to all NHS staff to provide leadership indeed, the University of , which proposes in their communities by getting the flu jab. It is free for to do the same for its students. everybody who works in health and social care and they should get it. Kim Johnson (Liverpool, Riverside) (Lab): Liverpool incidence rates have increased quickly and we are now Alec Shelbrooke (Elmet and Rothwell) (Con): It was on the precipice of local lockdown. There has been an brought to my attention by parents this weekend that increase of 247 cases on the previous week’s figures and some Leeds City Council schools in my constituency the latest weekly rate in Liverpool is now 120 per are telling parents that if their child has an upset 100,000, as the Secretary of State mentioned. What stomach or general malaise they need to go home, additional resources does the Secretary of State plan to isolate and not come back to school until they have had provide to Liverpool and other local authorities to a negative test. Does my right hon. Friend agree that assist them in dealing with further localised outbreaks? that is not NHS England advice, and puts unwarranted pressure on the test and trace system? Does he agree Matt Hancock: The hon. Lady asks an important that Leeds City Council should get a grip on this question. We are putting more testing into Liverpool, immediately? notwithstanding the challenges in testing capacity,because it is exactly the sort of place where we need to put that Matt Hancock: I am afraid I do agree. All councils, testing. We are also bringing in £500 of support for including Leeds City Council, should make it clear that everybody on a low income who has to self-isolate, if students have coronavirus symptoms—and we all whether they have tested positive themselves or are a know what they are: a new continuous cough, a temperature contact of somebody who has tested positive and have or a loss of taste and smell—they should come forward been contacted through NHS Test and Trace. I support for a test. If they have symptoms of another illness—not the hon. Lady in her work as the local representative to coronavirus symptoms—they should not come forward explain to her constituents in Liverpool, Riverside how for a test. We have set this out very clearly once again in important it is to follow the rules. the prioritisation document that we have published today, and I hope that everyone will follow it. Mr Simon Clarke (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Con): The whole country will recognise the James Murray ( North) (Lab/Co-op) [V]: Schools unenviable choices that the Government face at this that become aware of a covid-19 case have been encouraged time. Whatever further measures are in contemplation to take swift action and contact the dedicated advice for the days ahead, may I issue a plea for proportionality? service introduced by Public Health England. However, Does the Secretary of State agree that human beings in several primary school heads in my constituency have a free society must have a right to some social contact as reported that the service appears to be overwhelmed, they go about their daily lives, even at this difficult time? with significant delays in Public Health England getting back to schools with advice. Can the Secretary of State Matt Hancock: I agree with that 100%. We put in tell me what the average waiting time is between a place support bubbles for single households—those who school contacting Public Health England and its receiving live alone—during the lockdown precisely for that reason. the advice that it needs? I remember having a Zoom with a whole load of people and somebody said, “I haven’t seen anybody in person Matt Hancock: I do not have those figures, but I for four months,” and I thought that could not be good would be very happy to look into specific cases, because or right. We have put in place support bubbles for single the speed of turnaround in the instance that the hon. households for that purpose and of course bear such Gentleman describes is very important. impacts in mind when we take the decisions we take. Anthony Browne (South ) (Con): My Mr Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield) (Lab/Co-op) [V]: right hon. Friend and his scientific advisers are absolutely I am sure the Secretary of State will agree that we in right—the virus is not getting any weaker—but Kirklees and are working hard as a doctors, including many in my constituency of South team to meet the crisis in these uncertain times, with Cambridgeshire, have made great progress in the treatment tens of thousands of students now moving across the of coronavirus, and social distancing means that viral country. Will he bear in mind the fact that our system loads are less, making cases less severe for many people. relies on fit and healthy NHS staff? The crisis we are in Can he tell me what estimate he has made of the impact is getting worse, and if we get a virulent flu virus this of these developments on the fatality rates for those winter, which is coming soon, and that knocks out a who are affected? large percentage of NHS staff, we are going to be in serious trouble. A significant percentage of NHS workers Matt Hancock: Yes,of course.My hon. Friend represents are refusing to get a flu jab; what can we do about that? one of the finest hospitals not just in the country but in the world. The clinicians who work at Addenbrooke’s Matt Hancock: The hon. Gentleman and I have and across the country have improved the treatment of occasionally tangled across these Dispatch Boxes, but I coronavirus. Weknow that treatment with dexamethasone wholeheartedly support what he said and agree with has reduced the death rate. We know that, because of him entirely. It is policy that everybody in the NHS earlier oxygenation and later intubation, that has reduced should get a flu jab. The NHS flu programme has the death rate. There is also progress with remdesivir. 633 Covid-19 Update 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Covid-19 Update 634

[Matt Hancock] deserves a straight answer on whether his Department has imposed a financial penalty or withheld payments Nevertheless, while that has reduced mortality for those for the many voided tests undertaken by Randox. Will going into hospital, the virus remains deadly, so he give an answer to that question today? unfortunately we have to take measures to stop its spread, not least because we can either take measures Matt Hancock: Randox delivers a very significant now or we will end up with a much bigger problem, still number of tests every single day—it is a growing number. having to take measures later. In fact, it is currently outperforming the allocation that we have asked it to deliver, and I pay tribute to every Dr Rupa Huq (Ealing Central and Acton) (Lab): single person who works at Randox for the work that Top-rated medical research has continuously linked they have done and the part that they have played in vitamin D levels with covid incidence. In Norway, where keeping people safe. Everybody who gets a Randox test people have high amounts, cases are rare, whereas here, result, just like every other test result, has more information most Brits are deficient. It is rarely found in food, and that they can use to keep themselves safe, and we have the main source—sunlight—is about to disappear, with more information that we can use to try to keep the a possible winter NHS crisis on the way. Will the whole of society safe. Secretary of State follow the science, as there is no vaccine in sight, and seek to prescribe supplements on Andrew Percy (Brigg and Goole) (Con): I thank the the NHS, or at least run a public information campaign? Secretary of State for his Department’s allocation to People need something positive now that the nights are Scunthorpe General Hospital last week. I also wish him drawing in. well with the ongoing work for some extra funding for Goole and District Hospital. On tests for schools, the Matt Hancock: Vitamin D is one of the many things feedback I have had from schools in my constituency that we have looked into, to see whether it reduces the has been very positive about the 10 tests with which incidence or impact of coronavirus. I have seen reports they have been issued. Will he continue to seek to grow that it does, so we put it into a trial. Unfortunately, the that number and look in particular at a lot of the rural results were that it does not appear to have any impact. schools where getting access to a test is particularly That is the latest clinical advice, which is always kept difficult due to transport issues? under review. Sir Graham Brady (Altrincham and Sale West) (Con): Matt Hancock: Yes, giving 10 tests to all schools Does my right hon. Friend agree that balancing the across the country has proved very popular, according measures to tackle covid with the other health consequences, to the feedback that I have had. I am very glad to hear such as cancer patients going undiagnosed or not being that that is true in my hon. Friend’s part of the world as treated in time, and the economic and social consequences well. Of course we will continue that, with the right is a political judgment, and does he further agree that level of tests being sent out to the right types of schools political judgments are improved by debate and scrutiny? in the right places, and I will make sure that we take into account rurality as one of those factors. Matt Hancock: Yes, I do. I come to this Dispatch Box as often as possible. I am very sorry that I was unable to Tonia Antoniazzi (Gower) (Lab) [V]: On Fridayafternoon, come on Friday to discuss Friday’s decision, but the the Department for Work and Pensions informed Jobcentre House was not sitting. I agree with my hon. Friend that, staff that, from today,they have to reintroduce face-to-face essentially, the more scrutiny, the better; that is my 10 minute work search interviews with customers. So, attitude. I am very happy to continue to work with him Secretary of State, in the light of the rising number of and with you, Mr Speaker, to ensure that that scrutiny cases and with everyone meant to be playing their part, can be done at the speed that is sometimes required for is this really a sensible approach to be taking? these decisions to be made. Finally, on my hon. Friend’s substantive point, of Matt Hancock: One of the good things about where course minimising the impact on the economy and on we are now compared with where we were in March is education is critical, but there are impacts on the NHS that, in many areas, we are better prepared. We are of covid cases going up—not just the need to try to better prepared in the NHS. We are better prepared in minimise the negative impact that comes from restricting social care with the winter plan that we put out last other treatments, such as cancer, that happened in the week, and many employers and services, such as jobcentres, first peak, but the problem of the NHS operating with have been able to develop covid-secure approaches, high levels of covid cases. Within the NHS, a higher which means that they can get on with the things that number of cases itself has an impact on the care available they need to do. The specifics of the question, of for all the other conditions that we need to treat, but I course, are for my right hon. Friend the Work and look forward to working with you, Mr Speaker, to make Pensions Secretary, but the principle of how we, as a sure that we have continued scrutiny. society, manage to do more things while keeping ourselves covid secure is one that, thankfully, we have been able to Mr Speaker: So do I if that happens. develop over the past six months.

Stella Creasy (Walthamstow) (Lab/Co-op) [V]: I am Jason McCartney (Colne Valley) (Con): I very much delighted to have just heard the Secretary of State’s welcome the Health Secretary’s approach not only to previous answer, because, in a former life, he and I both save lives, but to protect livelihoods. I acknowledge and served on the Public Accounts Committee, so I know welcome his announcement on the new exemption for that he will understand that every taxpayer living in a childcare. Can he confirm what those new arrangements community facing a lockdown or unable to get a test are, and confirm that grandparents and others in my 635 Covid-19 Update 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Covid-19 Update 636

Colne Valley constituency—part of Kirklees, which push for this to get a UK-wide Cobra meeting set up, goes back into local restrictions tomorrow—will be and that undermines the four-nation approach. Does part of that exemption? the Secretary of State agree that if we have a four-nation partnership, Scotland needs the powers and the financial Matt Hancock: Yes, I can confirm that. The exemption levers to be able to implement its own local decisions, means that, for instance, if grandparents look after such as targeted furlough support for the hospitality children to provide childcare, where that is a continuous and aviation industries and perhaps help for the areas childcare relationship—that is the legal definition—that under local lockdown? will be exempt, in the same way that paid-for childcare will be exempt. This therefore does not allow for people Matt Hancock: I would urge the hon. Gentleman to to have children staying with others and, as I said in my take a lead from the SNP Front-Bench spokesman, the statement, parties and play dates. It allows, where a hon. Member for Central Ayrshire (Dr Whitford). These family member or other undertakes unpaid childcare are very serious times, and since the Prime Minister had that is akin to paid childcare, that they can be exempted. a conversation with the First Ministers of all the devolved I know how much many people rely on this to be able to Administrations this morning, as I set out, and I have get to work, and I am really glad we have been able to regular and frequent engagement with all the other make this progress. Health Ministers—in fact, I was having a text exchange with my Scottish opposite number just before coming Bill Esterson (Sefton Central) (Lab): Those of us who into the Chamber—I think the most important thing is represent areas that face additional restrictions as of that we take as united an approach as possible. That is tomorrow are happy to reinforce the messages, but we the approach that the Scottish Government are taking, need the Secretary of State’s help, don’t we, Mr Speaker? and we are working closely with them. The difference between the instruction of households that they “must not go and visit each other” as opposed Marco Longhi (Dudley North) (Con): I also welcome to saying they “should not go to the pub together” is the statement that the Secretary of State has brought to one of the ambiguities that my hon. Friend the Member the House today, particularly the emphasis he places on for Leicester South (Jonathan Ashworth) has highlighted fighting this common enemy as one united front. What right from the start of this crisis. It is an ambiguity that assurances can he give the House that our care homes is exploited by the virus, but it is also exploited, sadly, will protected, with lessons learned from the first wave by a small but important minority of people in this of covid-19? country. Will he clear up these ambiguities and improve the chances that everybody will comply with these necessary Matt Hancock: I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. new restrictions? Right across the board, it is critical that we are constantly learning about both what went well and what did not go Matt Hancock: The message that the hon. Member well. The social care winter plan that was published last should be putting out and that I will set out is that, week has been developed with the sector. I visited a care where we say that people should not socialise outside home on Friday and heard from the people there about their household, that is the approach that people should what they have learned about how policy is developed take. He makes a detailed point underneath that, but to make sure that we protect people in care homes as the top-line message to all of his constituents is, no, much as possible. they should not be socialising with people outside their household. Tulip Siddiq (Hampstead and Kilburn) (Lab) [V]: Shaun Bailey (West Bromwich West) (Con): I have Last year, I was faced with every parent’s nightmare as I been contacted by a large number of constituents over rushed my small baby to the children’s A&E at the the weekend concerned about the fact that a large Royal Free Hospital in my constituency because he was minority of people in retail settings are still not wearing not breathing. The doctors and nurses saved his life. face coverings. Most retailers are making sure that they The same children’s A&E will now be closed temporarily follow the rules and they enforce them, but what support from next month because of the pressure that covid-19 can the Department give, across government and at will put on the NHS over winter. Will the Secretary of local level, to ensure that when it comes to the small State give me a cast-iron guarantee that our local NHS minority, we can enforce these rules and ensure, as the will be given all the resources it needs so that this Secretary of State quite rightly said, that we are all in closure is strictly temporary and the children’s A&E this together and we will stop the spread together. service can be restored as soon as possible?

Matt Hancock: I agree with my hon. Friend that Matt Hancock: Of course I would be very happy to more enforcement is, sadly, necessary to ensure that work with the hon. Lady on this question. We do have these rules are followed across the board, because if to make sure that our hospitals are covid-secure. I people follow the rules across the board, it will be easier would be happy to meet her to discuss the specifics at to get a grip on the virus and the overall impact on the the Royal Free. economy and on education, for instance, will be lower. So that is the approach that we are taking both in the Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con): The trouble example he cites and more broadly. with authoritarianism is that it is profoundly inimical to civil liberties. It is also increasingly incompetent. It Alan Brown (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (SNP): The relies on acquiescence, and acquiescence for lockdowns, Secretary of State spoke about a four-nation approach, particularly national ones, is draining away. For instance, but in reality there has not been a Cobra meeting since if students are told not to go to pubs, they will simply 10 May. It has taken the First Minister of Scotland to congregate in rooms, which is even worse. If the Secretary 637 Covid-19 Update 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Covid-19 Update 638

[Sir Edward Leigh] they are prevented from going on holiday. Will the Secretary of State say emphatically that those people of State does not listen to me, will he at least listen to must have a full refund of the cost of their holidays, as a Professor Mark Woolhouse, a professor of infectious policy of central Government? diseases? He wrote in The Sunday Telegraph: “It is profoundly disappointing that six months into this pandemic, Matt Hancock: I am very happy to work with the having rejected every alternative proposed, we keep coming back hon. Gentleman and others to make sure people get the to lockdown”. fair treatment they deserve. He suggests—[Interruption.] I am trying to be constructive. He suggests that we rely on encouraging people to look Sir (Harwich and North Essex) (Con): after themselves, to protect the vulnerable and to take At a time when we do not yet have the world-beating responsibility for their own lives. That is the Conservative track and trace system or enough tests because of way. logistical problems, why are the Government excluding senior military commanders from key decision making Matt Hancock: As a Conservative, I believe in as and preventing them from bringing to bear their logistical much freedom as possible consistent with not harming capabilities? others. One of the sad things about this virus is that because of asymptomatic transmission, if people put Matt Hancock: On the contrary, the military’s support themselves at risk of catching coronavirus and get ill, has been absolutely brilliant in expanding the testing they are not only putting themselves at risk but putting system—test and trace—and it is engaged in the others at risk as well. That is the Conservative principle development of our vaccine roll-out plans. The work behind protecting the health of the nation in the face of that senior military personnel have done is absolutely this pandemic. first rate.

Tony Lloyd (Rochdale) (Lab) [V]: The Secretary of (North ) (Con): My constituency State will accept that a near-one-week turnaround for of North Norfolk, and Norfolk more widely, has seen tests for people working in our care homes is not some of the lowest infection rates in the entire country looking after our elderly. Can he be precise: when will thanks to the dedication and sacrifice that many people we get the 24-hour turnaround that we must have if we have made in my area. Can the Secretary of State assure are to keep the elderly safe in those homes? me that any further major national restrictions will reflect the low levels of infection in constituencies such Matt Hancock: We have protected the number of as mine? tests in care homes. The challenge is that when the system is running hot and the number of tests going Matt Hancock: My hon. Friend makes an important through is very close to capacity, that can have an point. He represents the oldest constituency in the impact on turnaround times. We saw that in the past country, so this is an important matter for him and his couple of weeks. Thankfully, those turnaround times constituents. This comes back to the central point that are coming down again, as well as our managing to it is critical to get the right balance between the measures protect the over 100,000 tests a day that go to social we take nationally and those we take locally, according care. While some people may call for other areas to be to local rates of infection. prioritised—for instance, the testing of children—the most important thing is that we protect those who are Liz Twist (Blaydon) (Lab): There will be a number of most vulnerable to this virus, and the most vulnerable relieved parents in my constituency because of the live in our care homes. change in informal childcare. I have spoken to primary and secondary headteachers across Gateshead, and it is Mrs Pauline Latham (Mid Derbyshire) (Con): I know clear that their difficulty in obtaining tests and getting the Secretary of State is very keen to get more tests. results quickly is causing real disruption for schools and SureScreen in my constituency has developed an antigen not allowing them to take swift action to stop onward test that is ready in 15 minutes. It will be able to ramp transmission. I note that the Secretary of State listed up its production to 1 million by November, rising to teachers in his statement, but will he do more to ensure 2 million a week. Will he please look at its test and make that tests are available for teaching staff and that results use of this expertise? I think that he will be going to a are available more quickly? Cobra meeting tomorrow, so will he explain to the Prime Minister that we live in a democracy, not a Matt Hancock: Of course I am working to exactly dictatorship, and we would like a debate on this in this that end. If somebody has the symptoms of coronavirus, House? they should self-isolate even if they cannot get a test. I understand how frustrating that is, and I am working as Matt Hancock: There absolutely will be a debate in hard as I can to try to get those turnaround times as fast this House on the measures that we have to use. We have as possible. to move very fast, and I am very happy to talk to my hon. Friend about SureScreen in her constituency. Dr James Davies (Vale of Clwyd) (Con): The self-isolation support payment of £500 comes into force next Monday (Caerphilly) (Lab): In south Wales, for those on lower incomes who cannot work from Caerphilly and Rhondda Cynon Taf are in local lockdown, home and stand to lose income. Of course, it is being and people in those boroughs cannot leave to go on distributed through local councils in England. Given holiday.Those areas will be joined by four others tomorrow that local government is a devolved matter, has my right evening. The have said that those hon. Friend had conversations with the Welsh Government would-be holidaymakers should have a full refund if about replicating the policy in Wales? 639 Covid-19 Update 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Covid-19 Update 640

Matt Hancock: Yes, the UK Government will be Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD): Over providing the funding so that the devolved Administrations the weekend I have been listening to headteachers from are able to put similar support in place. My right hon. around the south Lakes, who tell me that they are under Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster spoke increasing pressure, with teaching staff, teaching assistants to the First Minister of Wales over the weekend to and others off work, struggling to book a test slot. ensure that in Wales people can get the level of support Some have been advised to travel as far as Brighton, a that we are introducing in England. 10-hour round trip, and some pupils are off school for 10 days waiting for a test of their own. Our teachers are Neale Hanvey (Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath) (SNP): doing their job brilliantly.Is it not time that the Government The Secretary of State is quite right: these are serious did theirs and provided a testing scheme that works? times, and we require serious answers, so can he answer Matt Hancock: I would be very interested in the the following? It has prioritised VIPs over the public; it examples, especially of people being sent long distances, has a failure rate of over 90% on testing targets; it has because, as I said earlier, the information I have been the highest voided tests of any lab, including 12,401 in a given is that that problem has been resolved. I am single day; it has Conservative MPs on the payroll, and working incredibly hard to resolve all the other problems it was found by the National Police Chiefs’ Council to and to bring to bear the record testing capacity that we have committed the most serious breach of standards have. by manipulating forensic tests. Why, then, was Randox Laboratories judged an appropriate company to be (Winchester) (Con): Again, I support my handed a £133 million contract to the exclusion of all right hon. Friend and his statement today, but I echo others—or will the Secretary of State again resort to a calls for what comes next to reflect the reality on the churlish response, proving that the rules do not apply to ground in areas such as mine, where rates are way down this increasingly lawless Government? on the England average. Linked to that, as we move into what is clearly the next phase of this battle, will he look Matt Hancock: I implore the hon. Gentleman to at a much more devolved and decentralised test, track support all those who are working so hard to deliver the and trace system? I think “keep Winchester safe” will tests that people need. Every other question on testing have much more cut-through with my constituents, and is, “Can we have more tests, please?” and we hear stories that is surely better managed in Hampshire. about just how much these tests are needed. I think we should be there supporting the people who are doing Matt Hancock: Yes. We need the scale of the national the testing. system and the resonance of the local system and the local knowledge. We are increasingly driving things in Mr William Wragg (Hazel Grove) (Con): My right that direction, and I would love to talk to my hon. hon. Friend has many invidious choices to continue to Friend, who is incredibly knowledgeable in these matters, make, but, further to the question from my hon. Friend to see what more we can do. the Member for Altrincham and Sale West (Sir Graham Anne-Marie Trevelyan (Berwick-upon-Tweed) (Con): Brady), the wider health implications of covid-19 cannot I thank the Secretary of State for his and his officials’ be overstated. They include delayed cancer diagnosis, incredible efforts over the last few days that have meant missed stroke and heart attack treatments, and the he was able to make the statement today that informal cancellation of elective surgery. Will my right hon. childcare will sit alongside formal childcare to allow Friend therefore confirm that the Nightingale hospitals those selfless grandparents across the north-east and will be brought back online to minimise impacts on elsewhere where local restrictions have to be brought in wider healthcare? to make sure, out of the goodness of their hearts and the love of their families, that their sons and daughters Matt Hancock: The Nightingale hospitals are there, can go to work—often low-paid, seasonal work with ready to go if they are needed. They are currently difficult hours. I thank him for that. Does he also agree mothballed and can be reopened very rapidly. We are that it is for all of us to be selfless, not selfish, as we try working incredibly hard with the NHS to ensure that to get to grips with the second wave? this time around there is the absolute minimum disruption to other treatments,but of course the first, best minimisation Matt Hancock: That is a good point on which to end, of impacts on other treatments is not to have a sharp because my right hon. Friend has worked incredibly rise in the number of people going to hospital with hard over the last four or five days to try to ensure that covid. Our plan learns from what happened before. Of we find a way to protect people who use informal course there is the much more widespread capability for childcare without unnecessarily harming others by widening testing, both in the NHS and outside, thanks to the the exemption beyond what is needed. It is important to hard work of companies such as Randox and others. control the virus and keep listening to people as to how That means that we will be better placed than last time best to do that, and she has helped enormously. Her around to keep the rest of the NHS running, but it does final point is critical, which is that we all have a role to not mean that we can rest easy in terms of rising cases, play in taking seriously the rise in cases and hospitalisations because of course the easiest way for the NHS to that we have seen and making sure that we are all doing operate is to keep covid cases low. our bit to control coronavirus. 641 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 642

Point of Order United Kingdom Internal Market Bill [Relevant Documents: First Report of the Northern Ireland 4.40 pm Affairs Committee, Unfettered Access: Customs Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Slough) (Lab): On a Arrangements in Northern Ireland after Brexit, HC 161, point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. In response to the and the Government response, HC 783; and Oral evidence lockdown earlier this year,the Government made significant taken before the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee on changes to the operation of our railway network, which 16 September 2020, on Brexit and the Northern Ireland cost not millions but billions of pounds of taxpayers’ Protocol, HC 767.] money. After being in place for almost a quarter of a century, the Government announced in various media 3RD ALLOCATED DAY outlets today that rail franchises are to be ended and Further considered in Committee replaced by emergency recovery measures agreements.

In line with what seems to be common Government MR NIGEL EVANS in the Chair practice, at no point, despite being asked on numerous occasions, has the Transport Secretary,or any Government 4.46 pm Minister for that matter, come to the House to make a statement on any of those issues. Instead, they have The Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means preferred to make announcements remotely through (Mr Nigel Evans): I should explain that, in these exceptional media outlets and press releases. circumstances, although the Chair of the Committee would normally sit in the Clerk’s chair during Committee Mr Deputy Speaker, given that the Government keep stage, in order to comply with social distancing talking about parliamentary sovereignty but seem set requirements, I will remain in the Speaker’sChair,although on disrespecting the House, what influence could you I will be carrying out the role not of Deputy Speaker bring to bear to stop such abuse of the House and to but of Chairman of the Committee. We should be stop the Government failing to make major policy addressed as Chairs of the Committee, rather than as announcements to the House? What influence can you Deputy Speakers. bring to bear to ensure that the Transport Secretary comes to the House to announce such major transformational changes to our transport network? Clause 11

Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans): I thank the MODIFICATIONS IN CONNECTION WITH THE NORTHERN hon. Gentleman for notice of his point of order. I note IRELAND PROTOCOL that there is a written statement from the Secretary of Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the State for Transport on today’s Order Paper, which it Bill. appears may shed light on the Secretary of State’s policy.It is regrettable that such a major policy statement The Second Deputy Chairman: With this it be convenient was made to the press before it was made available to to take the following: the House. Mr Speaker has always been clear that such Amendment 45, in clause 40, page 31, line 16, at end statements should be made to the House and that insert— Members should have the opportunity to question Ministers “(d) the need to maintain the necessary conditions for on their policies. I thank the hon. Gentleman once continued North-South cooperation in— again. (i) the areas of environment, health, agriculture, transport, The sitting is suspended for three minutes for sanitisation education and tourism, energy, telecommunications, broadcasting, inland fisheries, justice and security, purposes. trade and business development, higher education and sport, and 4.42 pm (ii) any other area that may be agreed by a body Sitting suspended. established under the provisions of the Good Friday Virtual participation in proceedings concluded (Order, Agreement.” 4 June.) This amendment would aim to build into the Bill the need for ministers to maintain the conditions necessary for North-South co-operation in areas specified under the Good Friday Agreement. Amendment 48, page 31, line 16, at end insert— “(d) the need to ensure that there would be no new checks on goods moving from Northern Ireland to Ireland, and (e) the need to ensure that there would be no new checks on goods moving from Ireland to Northern Ireland.” This amendment would aim to require Ministers to have special regard to ensuring that there are no new checks on goods moving from Northern Ireland to Ireland or vice versa Amendment 41, page 31, line 16, at end insert— “(1A) When exercising any functions covered by this Part, any appropriate authority has a paramount duty— (a) to act without prejudice to all international and domestic law, including the Withdrawal Agreement; (b) to address the unique circumstances on the island of Ireland; 643 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 644

(c) to maintain the necessary conditions for continued The intention of this amendment is to mirror in Clause 40, in North-South cooperation; relation to the movement of goods from Great Britain to Northern (d) to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland; Ireland, the unfettered access NI-GB provisions in Clause 41. (e) to protect the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement in all its Clause 40 stand part. dimensions.” Amendment 69, in clause 41, page 32, line 4, at end This amendment is intended to provide a safeguard so that any insert— actions with respect to Part 5 of the Bill must be consistent with “(c) result in a new cost on an Northern Ireland business relevant existing international and domestic law commitments, in accessing the market or in meeting conditions of including the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement and its Ireland/ sale on the market that would not exist for Great Northern Ireland Protocol. Britain businesses.” Amendment 68, page 31, line 16, at end insert— The intention of this amendment is to make unlawful both direct ‘(1A) Regulations that would introduce new requirements for costs and administrative processes and indirect costs such as goods traded from Great Britain to Northern Ireland may not labelling etc being imposed on Northern Ireland businesses after IP come into force without the consent of the Northern Ireland completion day. Assembly. Amendment 52, page 32, line 4, at end insert— (1B) No additional official or administrative costs consequent ‘(1A) An appropriate authority exercising any function to on any regulations of the kind mentioned in subsection (1A) may which this section applies must have regard to the obligations of be recouped from the private sector. the United Kingdom under the Withdrawal Agreement, The intention of this amendment is to require the consent of the including in particular the duty to seek resolution of disputes Northern Ireland Assembly before trade frictions are imposed on through the Joint Committee.” goods traded from Great Britain to Northern Ireland, and to The intention of this amendment is to confirm the process agreed in protect Northern Ireland businesses from paying for any new the Withdrawal Agreement as the mechanism for dispute administrative costs. resolution. Amendment 67, page 31, line 26, at end insert— Government amendment 61. ‘(2A) On or after IP completion day, an appropriate authority Amendment 53, page 32, line 19, leave out paragraph (b). must not exercise any function in a way that would— (a) result in an existing kind of GB-NI check, control or The intention of this amendment is to omit the disapplication of administrative process being used— international domestic law under Clause 45. (i) for the first time, or Government amendment 62. (ii) for a new purpose or to a new extent; or Amendment 70, page 32, line 25, after “direct” insert (b) result in a new kind of GB-NI check, control or “or indirect” administrative process— The intention of this amendment is to include within the definition (i) being introduced, or of “NI-GB check” goods which travel indirectly (via Dublin, for (ii) being used. example) from Northern Ireland to Great Britain. (2B) For the purposes of this section— Amendment 71, page 32, line 48, at end insert— (a) a “GB-NI” check, control or administrative process is ‘(5A) Before making regulations under this section, a Minister one applicable to the direct movement of goods of the Crown must consult and have regard to the views of the produced in a part of the United Kingdom from Northern Ireland Executive on the proposed regulations.” Great Britain to Northern Ireland; The intention of this amendment is to require the Minister to (b) goods are to be regarded as “produced in” a part of the consult the Northern Ireland Executive before making amending United Kingdom (if not wholly produced there) if the Clause on unfettered access. the most recent significant regulated step in their production has occurred there.” Government amendment 63. (c) an “existing kind” of GB-NI check, control or Clause 41 stand part. administrative process is one that— Amendment 54, in clause 42, page 33, line 40, at end (i) was in use or available for use immediately before IP insert “, and completion day, or (c) the need to respect the rule of law.” (ii) is the same as, or substantially similar to, one that This amendment would require Ministers to take into account the was in use or available for use immediately before rule of law when making regulations about exit procedures for IP completion day (the “predecessor”); goods moving from Northern Ireland to Great Britain. (d) a “new kind of” GB-NI check, control or administrative process is one that is not of an existing Amendment 55, page 33, line 44, leave out subsection (5). kind; This amendment would remove the provision allowing international (e) where an GB-NI check, control or administrative and domestic law to be disregarded when regulating exit process is of an existing kind because of paragraph procedures. (b)(ii), that check, control or administrative process Clause 42 stand part. and the predecessor are to be treated as a single Amendment 56, in clause 43, page 34, line 21, after function for the purpose of determining whether subsection (1)(a) prevents its exercise; “provision” insert (f) the purpose for which, or extent to which, a function “while having due regard to the rule of law and human rights” would be used is “new” if the function has not been This amendment would require the Secretary of State to respect used for that purpose, or to that extent, before IP the rule of law and human rights while making provisions under this completion day. Clause. (2C) A Minister of the Crown may by regulations amend this Amendment 57, page 34, line 23, leave out line 23. section so that it applies to a type of movement instead of, or in This amendment would prevent the disapplication or modification addition to, a type of movement to which it already applies of NI Protocol Article 10 under this Clause. (whether that type of movement is direct movement or another type of movement provided for by regulations under this Amendment 58, page 34, line 26, leave out lines 26 subsection).” to 28. 645 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 646

This amendment would protect, under this section about Article 10 Amendment 43, page 36, line 27, leave out “whatsoever” of the Northern Ireland Protocol, persons having a right of action and insert in respect of aid. “other than the Human Rights Act 1998 and the European Amendment 59, page 34, leave out lines 41 to 44. Convention on Human Rights” This amendment would stop regulations under this section about This amendment excepts the Human Rights Act 1998 and the NI Protocol Article 10 having the effect that making rights, powers, European Convention on Human Rights from the definition of liabilities, obligations, restrictions, remedies and procedures that “relevant domestic and international law.” would otherwise apply in relation to aid, would not be recognised Amendment 44, page 36, line 28, at end insert because they are derived from international or domestic law. “other than the High Court, Upper Tribunal or Court of Clause 43 stand part. Session when considering an application for judicial review.” Amendment 60, in clause 44, page 35, line 20, at end This amendment seeks to make it clear that nothing in Clause 45 insert— ousts the jurisdiction of domestic courts in respect of judicial review of regulations made under Clauses 42 and 43. ‘(1A) The Secretary of State must take into account the need to respect the rule of law in considering whether and how to Amendment 47, page 36, line 28, insert — comply with the requirements mentioned in subsection (1).” ‘(none) “but excludes any provision of— This amendment would require the Secretary of State to respect (a) the European Convention on Human Rights, the rule of law in complying with the duty to notify state aid in (b) the Human Rights Act 1998, accordance with Article 10 of the Northern Ireland Protocol. (c) the Northern Ireland Act 1998, or Clause 44 stand part. (d) the Northern Ireland (St Andrews Agreement) Government amendment 64. Act 2006.” Amendment 31, in clause 45, page 36, line 17, at end This amendment would aim to put in place an understanding that each section of the Act should be compatible or consistent with the insert— legislation specified. ‘(3A) The meaning of “incompatible”, “inconsistent”, Clause 45 stand part. “incompatibility” and “inconsistency” in this Part shall be Clause 50 stand part. determined by regulations made by statutory instrument by the Secretary of State. New clause 6—Duty to seek free movement of goods from Northern Ireland to Great Britain— (3B) Regulations under subsection (3A) may not be made unless a draft of the regulations has been laid before Parliament Ministers of the Crown must use their best endeavours to seek and approved by resolution of the House of Commons. through the Joint Committee (established in the Withdrawal Agreement) the disapplication of export declarations and other (3C) Any draft of regulations laid before Parliament under exit procedures for goods of Northern Ireland moving to Great subsection (3B) must be accompanied by an impact assessment Britain, in a manner consistent with the terms of the Withdrawal of Her Majesty’s Government’s obligations under international Agreement and other international obligations.” law on Part 5 of this Act.” This new clause, while recognising that under the Withdrawal This amendment would require the definition of incompatible, Agreement export declarations and exit procedures fall under the inconsistent, incompatibility and inconsistency to be determined ambit of the EU Customs Code, would mandate the UK only after an impact assessment of the UK Government’s Government to use its endeavours to achieve a waiver for Northern obligations under international law has been carried out (see Ireland origin goods moving to Great Britain. Amendment 32). New clause 7—Compatibility— Amendment 42, page 36, line 17, at end insert— No power under this Act may be exercised by an appropriate ‘(3A) If no agreement has been reached before IP completion authority unless the exercise (or purpose of the exercise) would day between the EU and the United Kingdom on the free be compatible and consistent with— movement of goods in both directions between Northern Ireland (a) the Good Friday or Belfast Agreement of 10 April and the rest of the United Kingdom, a Minister of the Crown 1998 between the Government of the United may lay before each House of Parliament a unilateral Kingdom and the Government of Ireland and the interpretative declaration, applicable to the Protocol on Ireland/ other participants in the multi-party negotiations, Northern Ireland, setting out how interruption of the free which is annexed to the British-Irish Agreement of movement of goods between Northern Ireland and the rest of the same date, or the United Kingdom would not be in accord with the Protocol.” (b) any domestic legislation or subsequent agreement The purpose of this amendment would be for the Government to implementing the Agreement.” utilise a unilateral interpretative declaration in order to preserve This new clause would aim to ensure that powers could not be used free movement of goods between Northern Ireland and the rest of under the Bill if they were incompatible or inconsistent with the the UK without tariffs or controls in the event of no deal. Good Friday Agreement or its associated documents. Amendment 32, page 36, line 18, at end insert— Amendment 78, in clause 10, page 7, line 17, at end, insert— ““incompatible”, “inconsistent”, “incompatibility” and “inconsistency” have the meaning given in ‘(2A) In making these regulations, the Secretary of State must accordance with subsection (3A);” have special regard to the need to maintain the integral place of Northern Ireland in the United Kingdom internal market. This amendment would require the definition of incompatible, inconsistent, incompatibility and inconsistency to be determined The intention of this amendment is to ensure that further only after an impact assessment of the UK Government’s exclusions from the application of the access principles have regard obligations under international law has been carried out (see to safeguarding unfettered access of NI businesses to the UK Amendment 31). Internal Market. Government amendment 65. Amendment 79, in schedule 1, page 44, line 40, at end, insert— Amendment 46, page 36, leave out line 20. ‘(6A) In the case that there is one REACH authorisation This amendment would aim to put in place an understanding that process for Great Britain, an authorisation that is lawful for the each section of the Act should be compatible or consistent with the Northern Ireland market will be valid for the Great Britain Northern Ireland Protocol. market.” 647 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 648

The intention of this amendment is to apply the non-discrimination (Wokingham) (Con): Will the Minister principle to the REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation confirm that if the European Union kept its promise in and Restriction of Chemicals) regime. the political declaration of a free trade agreement, Amendment 4, in clause 54, page 41, line 24,at end many of the troublesome issues would drop away and insert— all would work smoothly? ‘(2A) The relevant sections of this Act come into force in accordance only if— Mr Walker: My right hon. Friend is of course right about that, and we still hope to strike a free trade (a) a Minister of the Crown has moved a motion in the agreement with the EU. I also point out that these House of Commons specifying on which date a issues can and should be resolved through the Joint relevant section comes into force, and Committee—I will come back to that. (b) that motion is approved by resolution of the House of Both the UK and the EU signed up to the protocol Commons. on the basis I just outlined. We are committed to (2B) The relevant sections for the purposes of subsection (2A) implementing the protocol and we have been working are sections 42, 43 and 45.” hard to ensure that it is done in a way that delivers the This amendment would prevent any of sections 42 (Power to promises that have been made. That includes working disapply or modify export declarations and other exit procedures), with the EU to reach agreement through the Joint 43 (Regulations about Article 10 of the Northern Ireland Committee process in a number of areas that the protocol Protocol) and 45 (Further provision related to sections 42 and 43 left unresolved, and we very much hope that agreement etc) coming into force before the House of Commons had approved can be reached shortly. But if it is not, the harmful legal by resolution the date from which they would take effect. defaults contained in some interpretations of the protocol, Government amendment 66. which were never intended to be used, would be activated. Everyone will know that the call list is very well The consequences for Northern Ireland in that scenario subscribed, so may I ask at this stage that those taking would be very damaging. We cannot and will not run part show some self-discipline as to the length of that risk. contributions made, so that as many MPs as possible The provisions we are considering today will therefore may be able to participate in this part of the Committee? ensure that in any scenario, we will protect Northern Ireland’s place in the United Kingdom; ensure that 4.47 pm businesses based in Northern Ireland have unfettered access to the rest of the United Kingdom; and ensure The Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office (Mr Robin that there is no legal confusion or ambiguity in UK law Walker): Thank you, Mr Evans. I am pleased to be about the interpretation of the state aid elements of the opening this detailed consideration of part 5 of the Bill, Northern Ireland protocol. which deals with matters relating to the Northern Ireland Protocol. I welcome this opportunity to discuss these Hilary Benn (Leeds Central) (Lab): Will the Minister provisions and the important issues they raise in depth give way? today.Before I turn to the specific clauses and amendments in this group, let me begin by making it clear that the Mr Walker: I will give way to the right hon. Gentleman Northern Ireland protocol to the withdrawal agreement in a moment, because I do intend to refer to some of his is designed to recognise and protect the needs and comments in my speech, and I will happily take his unique circumstances of Northern Ireland. Central to intervention shortly. that is ensuring that the Belfast/Good Friday agreement, Further measures will be set out in the Finance Bill. its successor agreements, and the gains of the peace These will have the same effect as those already proposed process are protected. But, above all, we must ensure in the UKIM Bill, and will make it clear that no tariffs that the delicate balance between all communities in will be payable on goods moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland is maintained and that the UK Northern Ireland unless those goods are destined for Government pursue policies for sustained growth and the EU market, or there is a genuine and substantial stability in Northern Ireland. Those have always been risk of them ending up there. We will take the necessary and will remain this Government’s priorities. powers in the Finance Bill to ensure that this is defined Through this Bill, we are acting to uphold those in a reasonable and proportionate way, which ensures priorities and deliver the commitments we made in our that legitimate traders are not penalised, while also election manifesto that we would provide unfettered resolving the outstanding issues relating to the payment access between Northern Ireland and Great Britain and of VAT and excise duty. So we are taking limited and reasonable steps through the legislation to create a legal “maintain and strengthen the integrity and smooth operation of our internal market.” safety net by taking powers in reserve, whereby Ministers can guarantee the integrity of our United Kingdom The protocol also explicitly depends on the consent of and ensure that the Government are always able to the people of Northern Ireland for its continued existence. deliver on their commitments to the people of Northern As we implement the protocol, that must be kept in Ireland in line with the three-stranded approach of the mind. Those commitments are, of course, entirely in Belfast/Good Friday agreement. accord with the protocol itself, which makes it clear that, among other things, Northern Ireland remains Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP): I declare an interest part of the United Kingdom’s customs territory, that as a member of the Ulster Farmers Union, which has nothing in the protocol prevents unfettered access from contacted me, and it says: Northern Ireland to the rest of the UK market, and “there will be a total amount under the NI protocol that will be a that in its application the protocol should impact as maximum we can give to agriculture in the form of support and little as possible on the everyday life of communities in there will be a certain percentage that we could give as coupled both Ireland and Northern Ireland. support.” 649 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 650

[Jim Shannon] open through the withdrawal agreement—the Joint Committee, adjudication and finally the European Court It clearly sees that less state aid will be available for of Justice—does he not recognise that that process itself Northern Ireland and we will be treated differently from could be so elongated that the economic damage done Scotland, Wales and the rest of England. Does the by the requirements of the EU could be very severe in Minister of State agree with that? Northern Ireland?

Mr Walker: I will come in detail to the amendment Mr Walker: The right hon. Gentleman makes a powerful tabled by the hon. Gentleman’s party later in my speech, point. That is why we are taking the powers in this Bill, but I do recognise that when it comes to state aid, we and we would seek the consent of the House before have made specific agreements under the protocol on those powers were exercised—it is to ensure that there is goods traded between Northern Ireland and the EU, a legal default different from the one that he suggests. It and we should stick to those in order to ensure the is about taking these steps in parallel. effective functioning of trade north, south, east and I want to recognise the significant concerns that west. We are taking steps in the Bill to clarify the state many Members have raised, which is why we have aid elements, and some of those will be to the benefit of agreed that a “break glass” provision should be included, businesses in Northern Ireland. I will come back to that requiring the House of Commons to give its approval point in more detail. before these measures are commenced. I will return to the detail of that shortly, but the Committee should be Hilary Benn: Will the Minister give way? in no doubt that this Government will always seek to ensure that the Belfast/Good Friday agreement is protected Mr Walker: If I may, I will come to the right hon. and that the political and economic integrity of our Gentleman’s point very shortly, and then I will happily United Kingdom is maintained. That is what the give way to him. Government amendments in this group seek to achieve. We would not take these steps lightly. We hope it will Clauses 11, 40 and 41 of the Bill give effect to the never be necessary to use these powers, and we would Government’s commitment to give unfettered access to do so only if, in our view, the EU was engaged in a Northern Ireland goods to the whole UK internal market, material breach of its duties of good faith or other in line with the protocol. They will ensure that we obligations. We would, of course, always activate protect the vast majority of the £8.1 billion of goods appropriate formal dispute resolution mechanisms with sales from Northern Ireland to Great Britain and guarantee the aim of finding a solution through this route in Northern Ireland’s place in the UK’s internal market. parallel to any domestic legislation. I draw the Committee’s That will provide vital legal certainty for businesses in attention to the statement that the Government made Northern Ireland, whose largest market is the rest of on 17 September . the United Kingdom—56% of Northern Ireland’s goods trade is with Great Britain—and deliver on a promise Jeremy Wright (Kenilworth and Southam) (Con): that has been repeatedly made throughout the process Can I ask my hon. Friend to go just a little further than of our exit from the European Union. he has just gone? He has explained already that the Government may end up in a position where entirely Clause 11 sets out that qualifying Northern Ireland outrageous behaviour on the part of the EU might lead goods will benefit from mutual recognition and are not to a conclusion that no Government could possibly discriminated against. It ensures that the mutual recognition accept. Can I ask him to confirm that in those circumstances principle will apply to all such goods that will also the Government would explore to the fullest all the benefit from unfettered access under clause 40. Clause 40 options available to them within the withdrawal agreement ensures that, in implementing the protocol, authorities before resorting to any breach of international law must have special regard to the fundamental need to outside the withdrawal agreement—accepting, of course, maintain Northern Ireland’s integral place in the UK’s that there would come a time when if the Government internal market and customs territory and to facilitate did not act unilaterally it would then be too late to the free flow of goods between Northern Ireland do so? and Great Britain. That, of course, applies to trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland in both directions. Mr Walker: I absolutely hear what my right hon. and learned Friend has said, and I draw his attention to the Clause 41 ensures that there will be no new checks, words of the Prime Minister, who said that we would controls or administrative processes on goods moving simultaneously pursue every possible redress under from Northern Ireland to Great Britain. This clause is international law,including those provided by the protocol. in keeping with what the Government have constantly In those circumstances, in addition to our steps under said, including in our manifesto, and in line with our domestic law, we would—if we had to—make it clear commitments to businesses in the “New Decade, New that we believed that the EU was engaged in a material Approach” agreement. breach of its duties in good faith as required and Clauses 42, 43 and 45 set out the safety net that I have provided for under the withdrawal agreement and the described. Clause 42 ensures that full unfettered access Vienna convention on the law of treaties. is guaranteed in any scenario by providing a power to disapply or modify the requirement for export declarations Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP): This is a very or other exit procedures when goods move from Northern important issue.If it is the case that, before the Government Ireland to Great Britain. As the right hon. Member for introduced the measures contained in this Bill, or those Leeds Central (Hilary Benn) rightly said on Second the Minister has promised will be contained in the Reading, there is no real justification for such declarations Finance Bill, he would first pursue the avenues that are being needed to protect the EU’s single market or 651 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 652 customs union. It is a wholly reasonable suggestion 5 pm from the UK that this issue can and should be resolved through the Joint Committee, but if it is not—and this Mr Walker: I will make a little progress. is perhaps where he and I disagree—there needs to be a Clause 42 is in keeping with what the Government safety net in place. have constantly said, including public commitments from the Prime Minister, our manifesto commitments Hilary Benn: I am grateful to the Minister for giving and commitments to the people of Northern Ireland. It way on that point. I want to press him on the safeguard is clear from the protocol that it is for the UK to measures that are provided in article 16 of the protocol implement unfettered access. Declarations of the sort and the extent to which they enable the Government to that would be disapplied through this clause would be take action if they think the EU is being unreasonable. contrary to the recognition in the protocol that Northern There is a one-month waiting period, but after that, the Ireland is part of the customs territory of the United Government are able to take safeguard measures. Kingdom. Annex 7(5) goes on to say: Clauses 43 and 44 provide a similar safety net in the “The safeguard measures taken shall be the subject of consultations case of EU state aid rules that will apply in the UK by in the Joint Committee every 3 months”. virtue of the protocol. Clause 43 gives the Secretary of Could he clarify what would cause those safeguard State the ability to ensure there is no ambiguity in UK measures to come to an end? Would it be a decision of law about the interpretation of article 10 of the protocol, the arbitration mechanism that the Government lost? which provides that EU state aid rules will apply in Could it then go to the European Court of Justice? In respect of goods and electricity traded between Northern other words, could he explain why what the Government Ireland and the EU. A clear interpretation of how they negotiated to protect the country from bad faith action will apply may be needed in the interests of legal by the EU is insufficient? We have not had an answer to certainty for both public authorities granting subsidies that question. and companies throughout the UK receiving support. There is a risk that a maximalist interpretation of Mr Walker: We are talking about the question of article 10 of protocol by the EU, which was never legal default. The UK Government are responsible for intended but is none the less a risk we must protect their implementation of the protocol, and we want to against, could give the European Commission extensive ensure that we have the necessary powers in UK law to jurisdiction over subsidies granted in the rest of the avoid those legal defaults. As I have said, we would UK, known as reach-back. All the subsidies granted to initiate all necessary proceedings in international law, the services sector in Northern Ireland could be caught including those under the protocol, if necessary, at that even if there is no link, or only a trivial one, to a goods stage. It is not a stage that any of us want to get to, and provider. we still hope to resolve these issues through the Joint Committee. Ian Paisley (North Antrim) (DUP): Absolute clarity and certainty is required on this state aid issue. For Mr Mark Harper (Forest of Dean) (Con): There is a example, will traders in Northern Ireland be able to way of reconciling the points made by my right hon. benefit from subsidy paid by the EU, will they be able to and learned Friend the Member for Kenilworth and benefit only from subsidy paid by the UK, or will they Southam (Jeremy Wright) and the right hon. Member be able to benefit from both? If it is both, that would for Leeds Central (Hilary Benn). Under the amendment certainly address the issue of the best of both worlds, that the Government have tabled, which my hon. Friend but I think it is an absolute nonsense, because it will not the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert be allowed to happen. Can the Minister clear up that Neill) paved the way for, is it not the case that Ministers matter immediately? Will the European Union, or our would have to come to this House and make a case that predatory neighbour to the south of Ireland, be able to it found compelling before they could use these powers? stop Northern Ireland benefiting from free ports that As the Bill was formerly drafted—this is why so many could be given to Northern Ireland? Would they be able of us had concerns about it—Ministers could have to block that? Clarity on those issues is absolutely made those resolutions under the affirmative procedure, essential. and the powers would have come into force before any of us had a say. Under the amended Bill, Ministers Mr Walker: The hon. Gentleman raises some important would have to come to the House in advance, make the points. It is for the Secretary of State for Business, case and win not only the argument but the support of Energy and Industrial Strategy to use the powers in the this House. That should reassure us all that these powers Bill to take further steps in setting out the UK’s state will only be used when absolutely necessary. aid policy. As the hon. Gentleman will recognise, the UK also has a policy on free ports, which we absolutely Mr Walker: My right hon. Friend is absolutely right. want Northern Ireland to be part of, so perhaps that is I was going to come in more detail to the amendment for future debates. tabled by our hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Let me be clear: the Government’s position is that Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill), the Chair of the Justice EU state aid rules will apply in Northern Ireland as Committee, and the Government’samendment in response, long as the protocol is in place in respect of goods and but my right hon. Friend is absolutely right in what he electricity, as agreed, but we have to give businesses the says, and that should provide significant reassurance to certainty that they will not face the destabilising prospect Members across the House. of the European Commission applying its state aid rules to companies in Great Britain with no link, or Several hon. Members rose— only a trivial link, to Northern Ireland. The power in 653 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 654

[Mr Robin Walker] Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con): The objection seems to be that we may have to act in this way, but we the Bill allows the Business Secretary to make provision do not want to break international law. Has my hon. for how article 10 is to be interpreted for domestic Friend noted my amendment 45, which shows a way purposes. through? Under the Vienna convention, which is already mentioned through the conditional interpretative Mrs (Maidenhead) (Con): My hon. declaration, if another party is acting in bad faith, we Friend has been setting out throughout his speech that can use the declaration to escape from an impossible the Government want clauses 41 to 45 because of the situation. Will the Minister at least look at that amendment? bad consequences that could come from an interpretation Mr Walker: I will look at my hon. Friend’s amendment. of the withdrawal agreement. If the potential consequences I will come to amendments shortly—I realise that I of the withdrawal agreement were so bad, why did the need to make some more progress in addressing the Government sign it? many amendments we face. Wedo not consider necessarily that a unilateral interpretative declaration would be Mr Walker: As my right hon. Friend knows well, the required, although as I said, we will use all the tools at withdrawal agreement was negotiated by the UK and our disposal to resolve the issue within the terms of the the EU and agreed with a view that certain elements protocol before using the powers in the Bill. If that is would be resolved by the Joint Committee. I think there one that we considered would help, we would not hesitate was a reasonable expectation on both sides that the to use it, but we do not see the need for the amendment Joint Committee would have made more progress on in that respect. those issues, but unfortunately we have heard some For the avoidance of doubt, let me confirm again harmful interpretations over the past few months. The that we are of course committed to implementing the point of these Government clauses is to ensure that we withdrawal agreement and the Northern Ireland protocol, can rule those out and put in place the appropriate legal and have already taken many practical steps to do that. default. However, as a responsible Government, we cannot allow the gains of the peace process or the economic integrity Stephen Farry (North Down) (Alliance): Surely the of the UK’s internal market to be compromised Government’s approach is self-defeating in the following inadvertently by unintended consequences and harmful respect? Ministers rightly outline that a range of issues legal defaults suggested by some interpretations of the are still to be resolved through the Joint Committee. For protocol. that, we need to prove to the European Union that the Finally, clause 50 disapplies certain provisions of the UK can be trusted if various derogations are granted to UK Internal Market Bill in the scenario that Northern the UK, but if we pass legislation that still contains Ireland’s representatives resolve, under the protocol’s even the merest threat of breaching the existing agreement, consent mechanism, that articles 5 to 10 of the protocol why would the EU be flexible and give us that trust as should cease to apply. This is a practical step to account we will not have shown the ability to follow through for and respect the principle of consent enshrined in the with other previous agreements? protocol. The protocol itself is not codified as a permanent solution for Northern Ireland, and neither should it be Mr Walker: I have to say to the hon. Gentleman that in the domestic legislation that implements it. Taken we have consistently followed through with our agreement. together, these clauses deliver on our commitments to We have done that with the delivery of protocol Northern Ireland. requirements when it comes to the legislation for the I want to address the amendments as briefly as I can, dedicated mechanism and to citizens’ rights, and we will so I will have to be limited in the number of interventions do so regarding EU state aid rules applying in Northern I will take. Ireland in respect of goods and electricity as agreed. Alan Brown: Will the Minister give way? Sir William Cash (Stone) (Con) rose— Mr Walker: The hon. Gentleman has tried to intervene for a very long period, so I will take one intervention Mr Walker: I will make a bit of progress and take an from the Scottish National party. intervention from my hon. Friend later. Clause 44 establishes a statutory requirement that no Alan Brown: I thank the Minister for giving way. If one besides the Secretary of State may notify the European we go back to the legal defaults that he says were never Commission of state aid where the UK is required to do envisaged to be enacted, will he explain why plenty of so as a consequence of article 10. That codifies in people in the House pointed out that these were the legislation the existing practice where aid is notified by very scenarios that could come about because the agreement the Foreign Secretary via the UK mission in Brussels was signed? Will he also explain why the EU is acting in and will ensure that a uniform approach to the state aid bad faith by upholding an agreement that the Prime elements of the protocol is taken across the UK. Minister himself said was a fantastic deal for Northern Ireland? Finally, can he explain what happened to this magical technological solution that the Government Alan Brown (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (SNP) rose— said they were working on that would prevent all this? Mr Walker: Clause 45 completes the all-purpose safety Mr Walker: I take no lectures from the SNP on this net for regulations made under clauses 42 and 43, so issue. It is clear that the reason why the SNP opposes that there can be no confusion about the position in the withdrawal agreement is that it opposed our leaving domestic law for our courts, businesses and public bodies. the EU in the first place. With regard to the development 655 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 656 of technological solutions, I agreed with Michel Barnier Amendments 64 and 65, in the name of my right hon. when he said that it is important that both sides look at Friend the Business Secretary, make it clear that any innovative and flexible solutions. When it comes to the regulations made under clauses 42 or 43 would, of future debate in the Northern Ireland Assembly on course, be subject to judicial review, contrary to some of consent, it may be that technological progress can help the claims that have been made over recent weeks, while with delivery, so I think that many of these arguments ensuring that any claims must be brought within a stand. We are committed to the protocol and to all our three-month period. That ensures that any challenge to commitments to Northern Ireland, including the unfettered the regulations will be subject to a timely resolution access as part of our United Kingdom. before the courts, which is essential to ensure that I turn to two amendments regarding the commencement Northern Ireland businesses and investors in Northern of these provisions that have been subject to much Ireland have the certainty that they need, which is at the debate and attention, including a number of powerful heart of the Bill. I commend those amendments to the and persuasive speeches on Second Reading. Amendment 4, House. As they clarify the position on judicial review, which is in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for amendment 44 is not necessary. Bromley and Chislehurst, the Chair of the Justice Amendments 61 to 63, in the name of my right hon. Committee, and is signed by my hon. Friend the Member Friend the Business Secretary, are targeted technical for North Dorset (Simon Hoare), the Chair of the amendments to ensure that the Government are able to Northern Ireland Affairs Committee, seeks to provide maintain the integrity of the UK’s VAT and excise in essence that break-glass mechanism on the key safety systems and can deal with any threats to biosecurity in net provisions in relation to the protocol by stating that Great Britain in response to changes required in Northern clauses 42, 43 and 45 of the Bill may not come into force Ireland under the protocol. until a motion in this House is passed. Since that In particular,the amendments ensure that the Government amendment was tabled, I am pleased that there have can act to address cases of double taxation and non-taxation been constructive talks between my hon. Friend the created by the Northern Ireland protocol, as well as to Member for Bromley and Chislehurst and Ministers, close down opportunities for tax evasion. and the Government have tabled amendment 66, which provides for substantially the same break-glass mechanism, The amendments will also ensure that both the UK with the additional requirement for a take-note debate Government and the devolved Administrations can in the other place. I hope that that amendment will continue, as they do now,to respond to specific biosecurity demonstrate to hon. Members, including the Chair of threats arising from the movement of animals and the Justice Committee, that we are committed to ensuring high-risk plants. The principle of facilitating actions to that any decision to use the powers is explicitly approved protect biosecurity on an ongoing basis between England, by Parliament. Scotland and Wales is already reflected in schedule 1 to the Bill. The amendments simply clarify that similar processes can also apply with regard to Northern Ireland Sir Robert Neill (Bromley and Chislehurst) (Con): I where there is a genuine risk of a biosecurity threat that thank my hon. Friend for the constructive tone that he poses a serious threat to the health of humans, animals and members of the Government have adopted in these or plants. matters. It enables some of us who otherwise would not have been able to support these clauses to proceed, on I commend those amendments to the Committee. the understanding that there is a specific parliamentary lock that bad faith on the counter-party’s side must be Mr Carmichael: May I take the Minister back to the proven to the House before these powers are brought undertaking that he gave to his hon. Friend the Member into operation, which of course all of us hope will never for Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill)? Some be the case. I welcome that, and it enables us to support of us have some misgivings about that undertaking, the Government’s amendment. because this Government have shown an exceptional fondness for withdrawing the Whip from those in their own party who disagree with them. In the circumstances Mr Walker: I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for of the parliamentary lock being necessary, can we get that point. A fundamental principle of our constitution, an assurance from the Treasury Bench at some point in and one that lies at the very heart of our exit from the this debate that any such vote will be a free vote? EU, is that this Parliament is sovereign. As set out in clause 38 of the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020, that means that it can choose to legislate to Mr Walker: The right hon. Gentleman should know deliver an interpretation of the protocol consistent with better, with his extensive experience, than to ask me to our understanding, while recognising that to do so is a comment on whipping matters. significant step. The parliamentary procedure set out in Several of the amendments in this group seek to amendment 66 recognises that, and provides a clearer, unpick, either implicitly or explicitly, the safety-net more explicit democratic mandate for the use of the measures set out in the Bill. powers. I therefore commend amendment 66 to the Committee, and urge my hon. Friend and all Members (Gillingham and Rainham) (Con): to support it and not to press amendment 4. Will the Minister give way?

Mr Alistair Carmichael ( and ) (LD): Mr Walker: I will perhaps give way on a point of Will the Minister give way? substance later, but not on that point. Amendment 41 seeks, among other things, to add a Mr Walker: Not right now—I will come back to the paramount duty to clause 40, requiring authorities to right hon. Gentleman. act without prejudice to international and domestic law. 657 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 658

[Mr Robin Walker] further and explain why we should withdraw the amendment at this time, given the verbal assurances he Amendment 53 similarly seeks to prevent authorities has offered. from exercising functions in a way that is incompatible or inconsistent with relevant domestic or international law. Amendment 52 appears to require the Government Mr Walker: I absolutely hear the hon. Gentleman’s to follow the process agreed in the withdrawal agreement concerns. I have made the point about what we have astheonlymechanismfordisputeresolution.Amendments54 said in the Command Paper and what the Prime Minister and 55 seek to prevent regulations made under clause 42 has referred to in respect of the Finance Bill. from having effect, notwithstanding international and Amendment 69 seeks to ensure that there would be domestic law.Amendment 46 would remove the Northern no new costs for a Northern Ireland business to access Ireland protocol from the list of international law that or sell in the market. The UK Government have already may be set aside, undermining the intent of clauses 42 committed in legislation to delivering unfettered access and 43. for Northern Ireland businesses, including through the Amendments 57 and 59 would prevent regulations Bill, which will apply the principles of mutual recognition under clause 43 from interpreting, disapplying or modifying and non-discrimination to qualifying Northern Ireland the effect of article 10 of the protocol. Clause 43 is a goods, thereby ensuring that they can continue to be necessary provision that will ensure that the Secretary sold in the Great Britain market in the same way as of State’s interpretation will achieve the correct effect in now. The amendment is therefore unnecessary. domestic law. Amendment 70 seeks to ensure that goods moving I repeat that the Government are committed to from Northern Ireland to Great Britain through Ireland implementing the withdrawal agreement and the Northern will benefit from unfettered access. I reassure Members Ireland protocol; however, as a responsible Government that we recognise the importance of trade from Northern we cannot accept any amendments that would undermine Ireland to Great Britain that moves via Dublin to the provisions in the Bill and render them no kind of Holyhead. We are currently engaging with businesses safety net at all, thereby risking the compromising of and the Northern Ireland Executive on the long-term the UK internal market’seconomic integrity by unintended means for delivering qualifying status for unfettered consequences or harmful defaults contained in some access. It would be wrong to pre-empt the outcome of interpretations of the protocol, or creating confusion or that consultation, so the Government cannot accept the uncertainty about the position in domestic law.I therefore amendment. urge right hon. and hon. Members to withdraw the On amendment 71, the Government have been working amendments. and will continue to work closely with the Northern Ireland Executive on the implementation of the protocol, 5.15 pm including on unfettered access, but we do not agree that I recognise the spirit behind amendments 67 and 68. a restriction on the Government’s powers to make The Government have been clear that, as we set out in regulations effectively would be justified. the Command Paper, we will ensure that there are no tariffs on any goods that remain within the UK customs We resist amendment 72 on the basis that it is legally territory. I hope Members will welcome the further unnecessary. The current wording already encompasses relevant measures that will be set out in the Finance Bill. distortions of competition between persons supplying goods or services in the course of a business within the There will not be any new customs infrastructure in UK internal market. Such wording is already sufficient Northern Ireland. We have always accepted that there to cover the regulation of subsidies that would have the will be some limited, streamlined processes for goods effect of making Northern Ireland businesses less moving from Great Britain to Northern Ireland, building competitive in the Great Britain market. on what already happens at existing points of entry and limited to electronic declarations for businesses in Great Although the Government agree with the spirit of Britain to confirm that their products are for the Northern amendment 78, the whole Government are acutely aware Ireland market. of the need to maintain Northern Ireland’s integral place in the UK internal market, which is already Wehave outlined our commitment to providing extensive referenced many times elsewhere in the Bill, so we do support for businesses, including through the new trader not believe the amendment is necessary. support service, which will provide an end-to-end service and guide traders through all import processes at no On amendment 79, I understand Members’ concerns additional cost. This is a unique intervention, backed and support mutual recognition and the non-discrimination by £200 million in Government funding to ensure that principle, but the exception to mutual recognition that businesses of all sizes can draw on the support that it we have introduced for chemicals is there to allow the provides. Given those assurances, I hope that Members relevant authorities to respond to local factors. will feel able to withdraw the amendments. Authorisations granted by the EU after the end of the transition period will not take local conditions into Gavin Robinson (Belfast East) (DUP): The Minister consideration. I emphasise that the authorisations relate invites us to withdraw the amendments. This is the to the use of substances of very high concern. It is second occasion in the past week on which a Minister important that the Government and devolved has stood at the Dispatch Box and held up an olive Administrations can take local factors into account branch of potential amendments or provisions that will when they decide how to protect human health or the be brought forth in the Finance Bill. We have not seen environment from the significant risks posed by such the text of those potential provisions and we do not chemicals. I therefore urge Members to withdraw or know their content. I invite the Minister to go a little vote against the amendment. 659 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 660

On new clause 7 and amendment 45, I want to New clause 6 would require the Government to reassure Members that the Bill includes provisions that “use their best endeavours to seek through the Joint Committee…the are there precisely to protect the essential basis of the disapplication of export declarations and other exit procedures”. peace process, by ensuring that, regardless of whether I appreciate the thought and sentiment behind the new further agreement is reached in the negotiations, there clause, but I am happy to say that there is no need for it will be no hard border between Northern Ireland and because, as I have already set out, the Government are Great Britain, and that Northern Ireland businesses committed to implementing the withdrawal agreement will continue to benefit from unfettered access to the and the Northern Ireland protocol. We are continuing rest of the UK market when the transition period ends. to work with the EU in the Joint Committee to resolve I can also reassure hon. Members that our commitment outstanding issues with the protocol, including export to protecting the Belfast/ Good Friday agreement of declarations. Although well intentioned, the new clause course includes protecting north-south co-operation in is unnecessary and I urge hon. Members to reject it. areas specified under that agreement, and the protocol is clear on that. That commitment is already enshrined I will now turn to the other amendments on our in UK legislation: in section 10 of the European Union safety net clauses pertaining to subsidy control. Now (Withdrawal) Act 2018, and through our continued that we have left the EU, we have the opportunity to support for this strand of the Belfast/Good Friday design our own subsidy control regime in a way that agreement throughout the process of exiting the European works for the UK economy. My right hon. Friend the Union. Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy set out the Government’s plans in this regard Colum Eastwood (Foyle) (SDLP): Can the Minister in a written statement to the House on 9 September. explain how people in Northern Ireland can have any Clauses 43 and 44 seek to mitigate the risks that stem confidence that this Government, who said only the from the European Commission imposing a broad week before last that they would break international interpretation of article 10. Ministers will still have law, will not break or undermine the Good Friday respect for the rule of law and human rights when agreement, which of course is an international treaty? making regulations using these provisions, which is why amendment 56 is unnecessary. I remind the Committee Mr Walker: As I have said repeatedly, we are absolutely that the purpose of the provisions in clause 43 is to committed to the Good Friday agreement, and I can strengthen our legal safety net and ensure that it is the give the hon. Gentleman an illustration of that in UK Government’s interpretation of article 10 that UK public law on the very next clause. I can assure him that authorities must follow. That is why we must reject amendment 48 is simply unnecessary. The protocol amendment 58. guarantees that there will be no hard border on the Amendment 60 would amend clause 44 by limiting island of Ireland under any circumstances. We are fully the scope of the Secretary of State’s interpretation of committed to delivering on that and no power in the article 10 when notifying possible state aid to the European Bill makes any change to that. We have already included Commission. Given the complex and novel nature of in law our commitment not to the application of EU state aid law through the Northern “create or facilitate border arrangements between Northern Ireland Ireland protocol, it is the Secretary of State who is best and the Republic of Ireland after exit day which feature physical placed to interpret and then make any possible state aid infrastructure, including border posts, or checks and controls, notification to the European Commission. The amendment that did not exist before exit day and are not in accordance with would require the Secretary of State to ignore the safety an agreement between the United Kingdom and the EU.” net that the Government have proposed when making That is set out in section 10(2)(b) of the European such a notification. Union (Withdrawal) Act, which I was pleased to take I will deal briefly with amendments 31 and 32. I through the House.For those reasons,the hon. Gentleman’s recognise the spirit of the amendments, but I have to say amendments are unnecessary and I urge him not to that they are simply not necessary. An assessment of the press them. legal implications of the clauses has already been provided On amendments 43 and 47, I can offer hon. Members in the Government’s statements of 10 and 17 September. an assurance that the recognition and protection of Nor is there any need to make regulations defining rights are fundamental values of the UK. Our human “incompatible” or “inconsistent”, because these are rights framework offers comprehensive, well-established self-explanatory terms. There can be no serious doubt and effective protections within a clear constitutional what they mean and no further definition is required. and legal system. The Bill is compatible with the European The true intention of the amendments may be to seek to convention on human rights, and the Minister who provide another point for parliamentary debate. If that presented the Bill has given a certificate of compatibility, is the case, I trust that the hon. Members who have pursuant to section 19(1)(a) of the Human Rights tabled them will support Government amendment 66. Act 1998, in the usual way. We remain committed to the On that basis, I urge them not to press the amendments. ECHR, as we have made clear time and again. Further on amendment 47, the Government do not Joanna Cherry (Edinburgh South West) (SNP): Will envisage any circumstances in which the powers set out the Minister give way? in clauses 42 and 43 could be used to amend the Northern Ireland Acts of 1998 and 2006. That renders the amendment unnecessary. For this reason, the Mr Walker: I have given way to the SNP already. The Government are not willing to accept the amendment. I hon. and learned Lady will have her chance to speak hope that hon. Members will be reassured by our very shortly. I hope that I have dealt with all the commitment on this very serious matter and will not important issues raised in this group of amendments. In press them. conclusion—[Interruption.] 661 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 662

Joanna Cherry: I respectfully remind the Minister been seized on by the Government, was introduced with that the SNP has 48 Members in the House, not just one good intention, arising from real, genuine concern among MP. I am grateful to him for giving way, because he has many Government Members, but it does not solve the dealt with amendment 43, which I tabled, but not with problem. amendment 44. Does he understand that insofar as In providing for a vote subsequently, the Government clause 45 seeks to oust the inherent supervisory jurisdiction have offered a sticking plaster to salve consciences, but of the Court of Session, it not only interferes in devolved we would still be acting in contravention of international matters but it is in breach of article 19 of the treaty of law—not when we enact the Bill’s provisions, but when Union between Scotland and England? I know that he it goes on to the statute book. The Government amendment does not have a Scottish Law Officer to advise him, but does not change that fact. Let us look at the withdrawal can he take that on board and address it now? agreement—as the right hon. Member for Maidenhead (Mrs May) did in her intervention—which was negotiated Mr Walker: I am happy to look into the specific issue by the Prime Minister, signed by him and commended that hon. and learned Lady raises, but if she looks at the to the electorate as the reason to vote for the Conservative text in Hansard she will see that I addressed the point party in December’s election. Now, apparently, it is so that she made about amendment 44. I mentioned a flawed that we have been asked to break the law. Government amendment that had been introduced on I saw the argument advanced by the Attorney separate issues, but I am certainly happy to take that General that it is okay to breach international law if point away for consideration. the decision is taken constitutionally. That clearly flies In conclusion, the clauses are a necessary protection in the face of the Vienna convention, to which we are a to deliver our promises on unfettered access and to signatory. Article 27 makes that clear: deliver what the protocol acknowledges on Northern “A party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as Ireland’s place in the internal market and customs justification for its failure to perform a treaty.” territory of the United Kingdom, and to respect the principle of parliamentary sovereignty. 5.30 pm Paul Blomfield (Sheffield Central) (Lab): I rise to ( South and Penarth) (Lab/ speak to amendments 52 to 60, which I tabled with my Co-op): My hon. Friend is making some absolutely hon. and right hon. Friends. Together, these amendments crucial points, particularly about the Vienna convention. seek to provide a solution to the mess that the Government Does he accept that there is an issue here that goes well have got themselves into by removing the provisions in beyond the provisions in the Bill and the process we are the Bill that put our country in conflict with international discussing regarding the internal market? That is that it law.Wedo so, because we want to maintain our reputation has damaged Britain’s reputation on the world stage as a country that respects the rule of law; because we when we have the right hon. Member for Great Yarmouth want to see a successful internal market for the whole () talking about breaking the law, when UK when we leave the transitional arrangements on we have an Attorney General who regularly attacks 31 December; and because we want the Prime Minister human rights, which the Minister has just told us the to deliver the “oven-ready” deal with the EU that he Government want to protect, and when we have a Lord promised the British people last December—a deal that Chancellor who talks about fudging the law. That is pledged tariff and barrier-free trade for services as well fundamentally damaging Britain on the world stage as goods,along with safeguarding workers’rights,consumer and our ability to influence and work with others. and environmental protection, and which offered a Paul Blomfield: I thank my hon. Friend for that broad, comprehensive and balanced security partnership intervention. He sums up well the seriousness of the underpinned by continued adherence and giving effect decision before us today. to the European convention on human rights. The Bill makes that less likely. Our talks with the John Redwood: Why does the hon. Gentleman not see European Union have been damaged, our reputation in that this Bill has been brought about by the EU’s wish the world appears trashed, and it is a mess that was to break the agreement and what he would call international completely unnecessary and is not resolved by the law by not respecting the sovereignty of the UK, which amendment tabled by the Government. This so-called is fundamental in the agreement, and not going ahead compromise may calm some Government Members, with the free trade agreement, which was meant to be at but it does not resolve the issue: the breach of international the core of the future relationship? law that has led to the resignations of the head of the Government legal service, Jonathan Jones, and of the Paul Blomfield: I thank the right hon. Member for Advocate General, Lord Keen, who said in his letter to that intervention. I would be interested to know his the Prime Minister that he could not reconcile his views on article 184 of the withdrawal agreement, which obligations as a Law Officer with the Bill, as he could embraces the political declaration as the basis for securing find no our future relationship. On the intentions of both parties, I simply cite the Government’s response to the Northern “respectable argument for the provisions at clauses 42 to 45”. Ireland Affairs Committee’s report on unfettered access, In an interview on Radio 4 last week, the Lord Chancellor in which they said: was uneasy in his defence of the Bill, as he might well “These talks began in March and continued throughout the be, having sworn an oath when taking office to summer in a spirit of good faith and mutual respect”. “respect the rule of law”. On page 7, they state: The situation could not be more serious, and we accept “The Government is extremely confident that the EU is working that the amendment tabled by the hon. Member for in good faith.” Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill), which has That is the Government’s view. 663 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 664

Sir William Cash: Will the hon. Gentleman give way? the Community is bound by a rule of international law…The relationship between international law and the Community legal Paul Blomfield: I am happy to give way again. I am order”— interested to know whether the hon. Gentleman will that is their constitution— pursue his point about the Sheffield steel industry, on “is governed by the Community legal order itself, and international which he is usually wrong. law can permeate that legal order only under the conditions set by the constitutional principles of the Community.” Sir William Cash: I am actually going to look briefly So the EU itself has the principle that it will vet its at a simple point, which is that, apart from our own obligations and not necessarily implement them, as it judges, the German federal constitutional court in requires. December 2015 clearly stated that international law leaves it to each state to give precedence to national law. Paul Blomfield: The right hon. Gentleman came back International law gives effect in that way. How does the at me on the quote I gave about trust. That quote was hon. Gentleman answer that? from the Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland, and it was about trust in relation to the Government’s actions. Paul Blomfield: I thank the hon. Member for his In terms of how we deal with the issues that the right intervention. I think the answer was provided by the hon. Gentleman refers to, I will come on to those Northern Ireland Secretary when he spoke to the House subsequently. on the issue and he said that—let us all think on these The Government’s cavalier disregard for the rule of words— law has been condemned by the Law Society and by the “yes, this does break international law in a very specific and Bar Council. It has shocked people across the country, limited way. We are taking the power to disapply the EU law and it has disturbed our friends and allies around the concept of direct effect, required by article 4”.—[Official Report, world. Part of the tragedy of the Government’s actions 8 September 2020; Vol. 679, c. 509.] is that they never needed to do this. Instead of throwing On that, he was right. Article 4 does require that the their toys out of the pram, there was a grown-up UK ensures compliance with paragraph 1 of the withdrawal solution there in the Northern Ireland protocol itself: agreement, including our courts, disapplying the dispute resolution mechanisms agreed by the “inconsistent or incompatible domestic provisions”. Prime Minister, to which the Minister has referred at Article 5 makes it absolutely clear that we have an length and which have been utilised already on other obligation to issues. However, in recognising those, the Minister failed “refrain from any measures which could jeopardise the attainment to explain to the House satisfactorily why the Government of the objectives of this Agreement”, have chosen not to exercise that route and have instead which, as the Northern Ireland Secretary made clear, is put this proposed legislation before the House. Article 16 the purpose of clauses 41 to 45. In adopting them, we provides for either the EU or the UK to take unilateral are in breach of international law and unsettling the safeguard measures: situation in Northern Ireland, to which the Minister “If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, rightly referred. Indeed, the Lord Chief Justice of Northern societal or environmental difficulties”, Ireland, Sir Declan Morgan, who is a widely respected and annex 7, to which I think he alluded, sets out the voice, said that the Government’s actions “may well process to which matters can be resolved through the undermine trust”. Joint Committee set up to oversee the implementation of the withdrawal agreement. Joanna Cherry: Does the answer to the question Do not take my word for it. The former Attorney raised by the hon. Member for Stone (Sir William Cash) General, the right hon. and learned Member for Torridge about the German constitutional court not lie in what and West Devon (Mr Cox), who I seem to recall was our own United Kingdom Supreme Court said at once celebrated in the Conservative party, made the paragraph 55 in the case of Miller v. Secretary of State case in The Times last week when he said: for Exiting the European Union? Our own Supreme “There are clear and lawful responses available to Her Majesty’s Court said that Government”, “treaties between sovereign states have effect in international law which and are not governed by the domestic law of any state.” “include triggering the agreed independent arbitration procedure Is that not the answer under the domestic law of the set out in the withdrawal agreement and, in extremis, these might United Kingdom? legitimately extend to taking temporary and proportionate measures, where they are urgently necessary to protect the fundamental Paul Blomfield: That is certainly an additional answer. interests of the UK”. That was his conclusion. And the Prime Minister could Sir Iain Duncan Smith (Chingford and Woodford not answer my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Green) (Con): The hon. Gentleman says that this is Central (Hilary Benn) at the Liaison Committee last about a collapse in trust. The collapse in trust in that week when he asked the simple question why he had not description is one way; that is to say with the UK been prepared to use those measures, which he negotiated, Government, because they are apparently breaching to resolve any disagreements, rather than engage in treaty law. However, if he were to go to the case Kadi v. lawbreaking. Commission, he would see that the Advocate General at So let me ask the Minister a simple question, which I the time of the case made it very clear. I want to quote hope he will come back to at the end of this very long this, as it is quite important: debate, on the question of state aid. The Chancellor of “first and foremost, to preserve the constitutional framework the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet created by the Treaty…it would be wrong to conclude that, once Office, the right hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Michael 665 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 666

[Paul Blomfield] The Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means (Mr Nigel Evans): Order. Let me remind the House one Gove), said it was a matter for the Joint Committee. more time that there is a very long call list, so please Will the Minister be able to confirm in his winding up show time restraint when making contributions. whether the Government have actually raised their concerns there for resolution? Mrs May: It is with some regret that I rise to speak on Our amendments seek to put the Bill right. They clauses 41 to 45. May I just say to the Minister that the reassert our commitment to the rule of law by removing overall intention of the Bill—of ensuring a functioning the notwithstanding clauses, which have been the subject internal market within the United Kingdom—is absolutely of so much attention, but also the other references to right? I believe passionately in the integrity of the disapplying the protocol and disregarding the law. United Kingdom. It is not just a belief; I think it is good for the prosperity of all parts of the United Kingdom. Sir William Cash: Will the hon. Gentleman give way? Today, we are focusing on the parts of the Bill that relate to the Northern Ireland protocol, part of the Paul Blomfield: No. I have taken one intervention withdrawal agreement—the withdrawal agreement that from the hon. Gentleman and, with respect for those was signed by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister wishing to speak, I will follow the injunction of the less than a year ago. I can say to the Minister that, in my Chair and make progress. view, clauses 41 to 45 have no place in this Bill. We are The Government are sending a worrying message, told that they are there because the EU either is acting too, about their attitude to accountability in Government in bad faith, or might act in bad faith. This is because amendments 64 and 65, limiting opportunities for judicial the withdrawal agreement put a border down the Irish review. Our amendments 58 and 59 would put that sea and the Government cannot accept that—but the right, protecting those rights for the scrutiny and challenge Government did accept that when they signed the of Ministers. If the Government are, as they say, acting withdrawal agreement with the European Union, and I reasonably, they should not be afraid of scrutiny or of assume that, when they did so, the Government signed challenge. Overall, our amendments 52 to 60 would that in good faith. Yet here we have clauses 41 to 45 enable the Bill to achieve its aims, but to stick to the rule saying that the Government should have the ability to of law, the Human Rights Act 1998 and our international renege on parts of the withdrawal agreement to break obligations. We hope that the Government will accept international law. them, but if they do not, we will vote against clauses 42 There are three reasons why I believe that these to 45 standing part of the Bill. clauses have no place in the Bill. The first, which has Many Members on the Government Benches talk been referred to in earlier interventions, is that it is about their ambition for global Britain. We share the unnecessary. There is an arbitration process available. desire for strong trading partnerships after we leave the Under article 175, the ruling of the arbitration panel transition, but that will be undermined by flouting should be binding on the UK and the EU.The Government international law, and the Government know that. The have acknowledged the existence of the arbitration Foreign Secretary was dispatched to Washington last procedure, but they are saying that they would enter week to calm fears. This visit seemed to make things into that in parallel with the operation of the elements worse. As he left the United States, the man that the of this Bill. The message, it seems to me, is very clear, polls indicate will be the country’s next President said: which is, if we do not like the outcome of the arbitration panel, then we will break international law and we will “We can’t allow the Good Friday Agreement that brought peace to Northern Ireland to become a casualty of Brexit. Any not accept it. Yet, again, that is breaking the international trade deal between the US and UK must be contingent upon treaty—an agreement that UK Government signed— respect for the Agreement and preventing the return of a hard because it is breaking article 175, which says that the border. Period.” view of the arbitration panel shall be “binding” on both He was adding to the views expressed on both sides of parties. However, there is not just an arbitration process the aisle in Congress that there will be no US trade deal available. As the right hon. Member for Leeds Central if this Bill proceeds unamended. We should remember (Hilary Benn) referred to, article 16 says: that the UK and the US are co-guarantors of the Good “If the application of this Protocol leads to serious economic, Friday agreement. It is a responsibility that the future societal or environmental difficulties that are liable to persist, or President of the United States seems to be taking more to diversion of trade, the Union or the United Kingdom may seriously than the Government. unilaterally take appropriate safeguard measures.” This debate is about our place in the world. It is Clauses 41 to 45 are not necessary. about our values. It is about the sort of country that we want to be.If we cannot comply with our treaty obligations, 5.45 pm how can we ever demand that others do so? We are Beyond that issue, there is the question of the impact giving a green light to oppressive Governments, from of these clauses and the Government’s decision on the to Belarus, who flout the rule of law. This Bill has operation of the Belfast/Good Friday agreement. I deeply damaged trust in our country and our place on believe that the Government’s willingness unilaterally the global stage. In our votes tonight and tomorrow, we to abandon an international agreement or parts of an have an opportunity to rebuild our reputation to make international agreement they have signed and their it clear that we are a country that can keep its word, a willingness to renege on an agreement they have signed country that can make agreements and stick to them, will lead, as has already been made clear in an intervention, and a country that believes in the rule of law. Let us not to some questioning the willingness of the Government fail in that responsibility. to fully uphold the measures in the Belfast/Good Friday agreement. That, in turn, will lead to some communities Several hon. Members rose— having less willingness to trust the United Kingdom 667 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 668

Government, and that could have a consequence on the We were able to do that because those countries had willingness of people in Northern Ireland to remain trust in the United Kingdom. Where will that trust be in part of the United Kingdom. So far from acting to the future if they see a United Kingdom willing to reinforce the integrity of the United Kingdom in pursuit break its word and international law? of trying to appear to be tough to the European Union, If we pass this Bill with clauses 41 to 45, and in so I think the Government are putting the integrity of the doing accede to the Government’s wish to break United Kingdom at risk. international law, I believe it will have a detrimental These reasons alone should I think be sufficient for effect on people’s trust in the United Kingdom. As the the Government to abandon these clauses, but perhaps United Kingdom negotiates trade deals around the rest the most compelling reason is my third, which is this of the world, why should anybody we are negotiating Government’s wish to break international law and taking with believe that we will uphold what we sign up to in the powers to do so. As the Law Society and the Bar those agreements if we have said clearly, “If we don’t Council have said: like it after we’ve signed up to it, we’ll break it”? “These provisions enable Ministers to derogate from the obligations of the United Kingdom under international law in broad and This is a country that upholds the rule of law. That is comprehensive terms and prohibit public bodies from compliance one of the things that makes us great; it is one of our with such obligations. They represent a direct challenge to the characteristics. We propound and uphold the rule of rule of law, which include the country’s obligations under public law around the world. The Conservative party upholds international law.” the rule of law—it is one of our values and I cannot emphasise enough how concerned I am that a characteristics—yet we are being asked to tear up that Conservative Government are willing to go back on principle and throw away that value. Why? I can only their word, to break an international agreement signed see, on the face of it, that it is because the Government in good faith and to break international law. did not really understand what they were signing up to when they signed the withdrawal agreement. Sir William Cash: Will my right hon. Friend give way? My right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Torridge and West Devon described the Government’s Mrs May: I have to say to my hon. Friend that I wish action as unconscionable. As has been said, Lord Keen I had £10 for every time I have given way to him in a resigned because he said that he found it increasingly debate or a statement over the last few years, but I will difficult to reconcile his obligations as a Law Officer give way to him on this one occasion. with the Government’s policy intentions. Frankly, I find it difficult to understand how any Minister can go Sir William Cash: I am most grateful to my right hon. through the Lobby to support these clauses. Friend. Is she aware that the EU itself and indeed many I consider that, in introducing clauses 41 to 45, the other states throughout the world, including many Government are acting recklessly and irresponsibly, democratic countries,have persistently broken international with no thought to the long-term impact on the United law, and that this applies not only to other countries, Kingdom’s standing in the world. It will lead to untold but to the United Kingdom? There are many overrides damage to the United Kingdom’s reputation and puts of international treaties by the UK itself. its future at risk. As a result, with regret I have to tell the Mrs May: Let me get this right. My hon. Friend Minister that I cannot support this Bill. seems to be saying, “If somebody else does something wrong, it’s okay for us to do something wrong.” I am Kirsten Oswald (East Renfrewshire) (SNP): It is a sorry, I do not agree with him on that point. privilege to follow such a thoughtful and considered I recognise that my hon. Friend the Member for speech. Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill) has taken I rise to speak to amendments 31 and 32, in my name every effort to ameliorate the impact of these clauses, and the names of my colleagues. They require that the and the Government have accepted and put down their definition of terms used in clause 45 be determined only own amendment. But, frankly, my view is that to the after an impact assessment of the UK Government’s outside world, it makes no difference whether a decision obligations under international law has been carried to break international law is taken by a Minister or by out. I am also happy to speak in support of the amendments this Parliament; it is still a decision to break international tabled by my hon. Friends from the Alliance and the law. This can only weaken the UK in the eyes of the SDLP,and I look forward to further debate in Committee. world. One of the great strengths we have as a country is our commitment to the rule of law, and this will have The SNP rejected the Bill on Second Reading because been damaged. Our reputation as a country that stands we will never support legislation that breaks international by its word will have been tarnished, and the willingness law—I am not actually sure why I have to say that. Our of other countries to trust the United Kingdom and its amendments seek to ensure that this Parliament understands values will have been reduced. So much for global the impact on its international obligations of any future Britain! decisions that it takes on the matters covered by the Bill. In 2018, when Russian agents used a chemical weapon The UK Government have presented a Bill that not on the streets of Salisbury to attempt to murder Sergei only threatens a breach of international law—a position and Yulia Skripal—a nerve agent that led to the death that now seems to satisfy manyConservative Members—but of Dawn Sturgess and affected her partner, Charlie was in itself a monumental act of bad faith that speaks Rowley—I led the action. I called on our friends and volumes about their view of themselves and the world allies to stand alongside the United Kingdom, and I led around them. the action that resulted in 29 countries expelling an Last October, speaking about his withdrawal deal, unprecedented 153 Russian agents from their borders. the Prime Minister said: 669 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 670

[Kirsten Oswald] Northern Ireland Assembly has just voted in favour of the withdrawal agreement—in favour of sticking to the “if we do this deal—if we pass this deal and the legislation that agreement that the British Government have made with enables it—we can turn the page and allow this Parliament and the European Union, and that includes the Northern this country to begin to heal and unite.”—[Official Report, 22 October Ireland protocol. It is the voice of Northern Ireland and 2019; Vol. 666, c. 826.] it is saying very clearly that this Bill is wrong. The range of the amendments to this section of the Bill alone make it clear—not that we needed the clarity—that healing and unity can hardly be described as the highlights Kirsten Oswald: I thank my hon. Friend that intervention. of his leadership. That is a key point for us. How can anyone trust a In November 2019, the Prime Minister said: Government who do not stand behind the agreements they negotiate—a Government who cannot even agree “Northern Ireland has got a great deal. You keep free movement, you keep access to the single market”. with themselves? The Minister spoke about the Conservative manifesto, The Prime Minister’s approach has led to several but it and the Conservative campaign boasted of the senior legal figures making a sharp exit. Sir Jonathan Prime Minister’s oven-ready deal. The Prime Minister Jones, the head of the Government’s legal department; was effusive in his support of the deal, calling it “very Lord Keen, the UK Government’s most senior adviser good”, “excellent”, “fantastic” and “wonderful”, but on Scots law; and David Melding, Shadow Counsel here we are, and he has changed his tune: far from his General in the Welsh , have all walked away. We deal being oven-ready, it is now only fit for the cowp. have heard about Lord Keen’s letter of resignation, but it was particularly telling in respect of the matters that Ian Paisley: Is the hon. Lady telling us that she and are before us today. He said: her party believed the Prime Minister then? “I have endeavoured to identify a respectable argument for the provisions at clauses 42 to 45 of the bill, but it is now clear that Kirsten Oswald: I thank the hon. Member for that this will not meet your policy intentions.” intervention. The short answer is no. Regrettably, I do That is a damning condemnation from a former chair not believe the Prime Minister, on this or other matters. of the Conservative party in Scotland. No Member The Prime Minister said at that point: representing a Scottish constituency can defend these “We have to protect the U.K. from that disaster”: clauses—or, in fact, this Bill—and expect to be taken a disaster—and that is his word, not mine—that was seriously when they claim to stand up for Scotland in negotiated by him and the same adviser as he has now. this place. The Prime Minister visited Northern Ireland last month We have also heard that the Sir Declan Morgan, the and talked of close co-operation between central and Lord Chief Justice—Northern Ireland’stop judge—warned devolved Governments, but in the least surprising news that when Governments break international law, that of the day, certainly to viewers in Scotland, he did not “might undermine…the administration of justice.” engage with anyone outside Westminster in the development of his Bill. He excluded all of the devolved Administrations That should concern us all. Even the hon. Member for from the process of developing a so-called single market Gillingham and Rainham (Rehman Chishti), who is a through the United Kingdom—plus ça change. Despite barrister, felt the need to resign as the Prime Minister’s the clear relationship between this Bill and the peace special envoy on freedom of religion. These are telling process, as well as not engaging with the Northern Irish actions and words that should give the Prime Minister Executive, the Prime Minister failed to engage with the pause for thought and reflection. This Bill is a grubby Irish Government. Despite the clear importance of power grab that we cannot and will not support, and doing so, he just breenged on regardless. We know why this part, as it stands, hangs like a badge of dishonour there was no engagement. It is because this shabby around this Prime Minister’s term of office—however Bill—his shabby Bill—had to be put together out of long or short that might be. sight of people that the Prime Minister could not Unfortunately, the Prime Minister’s approach is being control, people with respect for the rule of law and for propped up by those with somewhat flexible standards. accountability. The Attorney General’s take could most charitably be The SNP amendments would ensure that this Parliament described as mince, and the Lord Chancellor says he would receive an assessment of the impact of any future will resign only if the Government break the rule of law action on these matters on the UK Government’s in a way that is “unacceptable”, which obviously, for a obligations under international law—a proper assessment, Law Officer, prompts the question: what is an acceptable not the usual triumph of blustering bombast over good way to break the law? judgment by the Prime Minister. The people of Northern Ireland deserve better from the Conservative party, and What of the effect of the Bill on the UK and Northern our amendments recognise that. How can businesses Ireland? In October last year, when he was still trying to and communities plan with any confidence when their convince us that he had negotiated a great deal, the future depends on the internal battles of a party that Prime Minister said of his withdrawal agreement Bill: shows such scant regard for the rule of law? “For those who share my belief in the transformative power of free trade…a new deal, enabled by this Bill, will allow us to sign Colum Eastwood: There has been a lot of talk in free trade agreements around the world.”—[Official Report, recent weeks about consent. The hon. Member rightly 22 October 2019; Vol. 666, c. 830.] says that the devolved Administrations were not spoken By using this Bill to trash that deal, the Prime Minister to at all about this Bill. With all the talk about consent, has again exposed the ethical vacuum at the heart of his it might be useful for the House to know that the Government and undermined trust around the world—and 671 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 672 all the time he has singularly failed to deliver what is This Bill does not, in my view, breach international needed by Northern Ireland. As Professor Katy Hayward law, but our rule of law must be based on our Parliament of Queen’s University Belfast put it, making our laws for our people based on our sovereignty, “the one thing most hoped for from this bill—certainty—has not judges. Indeed, Parliament itself voted for section 38 become an even more distant prospect.” of the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020, without a single vote or even a voice raised in opposition, 6 pm as far as I am aware, in either House on Second Reading. The reaction from the USA has been clear. Presidential That Bill passed its Second Reading by as many as candidate Joe Biden warned: 124 votes. “Any trade deal between the U.S. and U.K. must be contingent The famous Lord Bingham clearly demonstrated this upon respect for the” in chapter 12 of his book, “The Rule of Law”. He said Good Friday agreement. Similarly, Nancy Pelosi said: clearly, with respect to the fact that it is our Parliament, “If the UK violates that international treaty and Brexit undermines not judges, that makes laws for our people based on the Good Friday accord, there will be absolutely no chance of a sovereignty,that he had come across a number of judgments US-UK trade agreement passing the Congress.” that had breached that principle. Wise judges do not Even Trump’s Administration are looking concerned. want to make political decisions. His unimpeachable The architects of the Good Friday agreement, from principles turn on their head the exaggerated claims both sides of the House, are united in their condemnation with respect to the breaking of international law that of this Bill, and of this part of it in particular. They has not taken place. have called out this Government’s willingness to imperil As I said, the German Federal Constitutional Court the peace process and undermine the UK’s standing in stated in December 2015: trade negotiations. “International law leaves it to each state…to give precedence All these issues would have been foreseeable if the Bill to national law”. had been accompanied by an impact assessment, as the Laying a Bill is not a breach of international law and is SNP amendments ask for. But fundamentally, at its privileged. If a treaty is entered into on the reasonable heart, this Bill is ill conceived, confused and very assumption that a state of affairs would exist, but that damaging—frighteningly like the UK Government. Neither does not transpire, the treaty is voidable. The agreement of them deserve our support. was written on the basis of the EU recognising our sovereignty, which has not happened. Sir William Cash: There are many essential reasons, International law is broken by democratic countries in our national interest and on constitutional and legal throughout the world and the EU, in their own interests. grounds, and grounds of practical necessity, for the The list is long, but I will give a few examples. Western clear, unambiguous “notwithstanding” clauses in the Sahara is one case. Another is migrants sent back to Bill that have been discussed in the context of clauses 42 north Africa and . In 2010, when the EU broke to 45. the Lisbon treaty, Madame Lagarde said, I mentioned in response to my right hon. Friend the “We violated all the rules” Member for Maidenhead (Mrs May) that this was a about the Greek and Irish bail-outs. The EU is unilaterally question not just of whether the Euro pot was calling changing the bilateral channel tunnel treaty without the British kettle black, but of whether, in the United our being able to prevent it. The EU threatened to use Kingdom, we had ourselves overridden clear treaties. the WTO’s most favoured nation principle against the There are too many—they are far too numerous—to UK contrary to state practice, core principles of world mention in this short debate. Of course, there is also an trade and requirements negotiated in good faith. enormous number of examples of international law breaches by foreign states—not only, in Europe, by I have another stack of examples, which I mentioned, member states but by the EU itself, egregiously. where UK statute has overridden international treaties. Furthermore, there are examples of other countries, There is no argument about it; it is there in black and every one of them democratically elected, having done white in the treaties and in the sections of various so. This question of values and reputation, and the enactmentsthathaveovertakenandoverriddeninternational issues that have arisen, has to be weighed against that law. context. It is understandable that some are bothered about Of course, there are many international treaties, and this to a degree, but the fact is— there are many aspects— Kirsten Oswald rose— Kirsten Oswald: Will the hon. Gentleman give way? Sir William Cash: I said, “to a degree”. Within the Sir William Cash: In a moment. There are many framework of international law, it is entirely a question aspects of international law that are sacrosanct—those of whether the degree to which it is done is commensurate in respect of torture, genocide and the rest, for example— with what is being proposed. The case of sovereignty and it is the fact that international law comes in many goes to the heart of the extent to which we are entitled shapes, sizes and degrees, as I am sure we all know. to take the action that we do. Basically, the point is that where the sovereignty of a This is less about breaking international law than nation is involved—the Vienna convention addresses about breaking the conditions in respect of state aid this question—and where we are at the highest end of and in respect of the manner in which the Northern where the national interest lies, other considerations Ireland protocol would operate in the UK with respect come into play. It is absolutely clear that in many to breaking the issues of contract and of the manner in instances, democratically elected civilisations— which people work in this country. We are faced with a countries—have themselves broken these treaties. critical problem, the effect of which is that if we were 673 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 674

[Sir William Cash] Gavin Robinson: It was not accepted by the Government, but the right hon. Lady was a member of the Government not to pass these clear and unambiguous clauses, we who brought forward three iterations of a withdrawal would find that we were subjected to EU laws—that we agreement that did not honour that provision. That were subjugated to them—in a way that would ensure provision was not honoured in the earlier iterations of that we would not be able to compete effectively throughout the withdrawal agreement. the world or support the workers of this country, particularly in the context of covid. Karen Bradley: The hon. Gentleman will recall that Section 38 was passed by every single person in this there was an addendum to the withdrawal agreement House and by the House of Lords. There is no doubt that was agreed and would have been lodged in the about that. The notwithstanding provision is inviolate; international court that would have made paragraph 50 it is in an Act of Parliament. These enactments do the part of an international agreement, but that was rejected necessary job to ensure the future prosperity and by this House. competitiveness of this country, and the opportunity for its people to move forward in an enterprise society Gavin Robinson: The right hon. Lady may be right on to enable future generations after Brexit to guarantee that point, but here we are yet again, seeking to legislate their jobs, their businesses and their future. domestically within the United Kingdom to right the wrongs of a negotiation that should never have advanced Gavin Robinson: It is a pleasure to follow the hon. in the way that it did. Our Government fell into the trap Member for Stone (Sir William Cash), who has that of trying to provide an answer when they did not know classic flair of oratory, as when he said that some what the problem was. They did not know what the Members may be somewhat bothered to some degree. future trading relationship was going to be. They did Whether we agree or disagree with him, he raises a smile not know what the overarching trade deal was going through the Chamber. to be between the United Kingdom Government and the European Union, and yet they set out to solve the I rise to speak in support of the amendments tabled problem of the Irish border without knowing what the by my party. Before I do, I want to reflect on the overarching provisions would be. That made no sense, comments from the right hon. Member for Maidenhead and it led us to the position we are in today. Here I am (Mrs May). I regret some of the comments she made this evening, asking Members to consider provisions about the implications for relationships in Northern that should be part of this Bill but are not and saying Ireland and the consequences associated with the Bill. that there are aspirations associated with this Bill that Be it her contribution or many others on Wednesday should equally apply to Northern Ireland—the whole and no doubt later today, there is an awful lot being said of the United Kingdom internal market, as stated in the that is not only at cross purposes across the Chamber joint report—but do not. That is hugely regrettable. but completely misses the point. The right hon. Lady embarked on a political strategy that was encapsulated I spoke on Wednesday about clause 46, on the provision by the phrase “Brexit means Brexit”, and for nine of financial aid, and my party’s amendment 22 to months there was no greater clarity than that. Here we clause 47, to ensure that there was no restriction on are four years later, and we know that what was outlined such aid for Northern Ireland businesses. The response as a national aspiration and what was agreed to in a from Government was, “That’s great. Thank you very referendum by the people of this country is not being much. Let’s consider it on Monday.” Here we stand on delivered for the people of Northern Ireland. Monday. I have enormous respect for the Minister, but we are hearing, “Don’t worry about your amendments. Members will remember the week in December 2017 We’ll consider them in the Finance Bill.” There remain when there was a flurry of activity around the formulation important concerns about the European Union state of what became the UK-EU joint report. They will also aid rules that will apply in Northern Ireland. There is remember the work that had to go into getting provisions nothing in this Bill, there is nothing in the Government’s placed in that joint report at paragraph 50, which not approach, and there is nothing in their plan that seeks only represented the principle that it was of no concern to amend or fetter the rule of EU state aid rules within for the European Union to impede or impose upon the Northern Ireland. integrity of a member state, but stated: “the United Kingdom will ensure that no new regulatory barriers develop between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United 6.15 pm Kingdom, unless, consistent with the 1998 Agreement, the Northern Ireland Executive and Assembly agree… In all circumstances, the Ian Paisley: Can my hon. Friend explain to the House United Kingdom will continue to ensure the same unfettered whether he believes predatory actions from the Republic access for Northern Ireland’s businesses to the whole of the of Ireland could in fact prevent Northern Ireland from United Kingdom internal market.” having a free port in his constituency,a free port operational That was in paragraph 50 of the joint report, but it was in the constituency of Foyle or a free port operational never honoured in the withdrawal agreement. out of Warrenpoint? Preventing those policies, which would be state aid policies, would have a detrimental Karen Bradley (Staffordshire Moorlands) (Con): The impact on trade, jobs and people’s prosperity in Ulster. hon. Gentleman is making some powerful points. Does he recall that, when the first version of the European Gavin Robinson: I am very grateful for the question, Union (Withdrawal) (No. 6) Bill was brought forward and I know that the Government would respond by before the election last year, I and others tabled an saying “Look in the Bill. It is for the Secretary of State amendment that would have put paragraph 50 of the and no one else to raise issues or notify the European joint report into the Bill, but that was not accepted by Union on state aid issues.” I am concerned not just the Government? about the operation of that provision, but the chilling 675 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 676 effect that the application of state aid rules from the the mainland, because potentially our competitive ability European Union has, when the Government consider may be greatly hampered by that discrepancy. Does my the potential support that they could give to businesses hon. Friend agree? in Northern Ireland. Again today, we hear that it applies only to goods and electricity, but I think it applies to Gavin Robinson: I do agree. I know that the Minister services of those manufactured goods as well. I think went through a number of the amendments we have there is a financial threshold of around half a million tabled and said, “Look, there are provisions about pounds, but much more clarity is required from the direct and non-direct discrimination and those still Government on the application of state aid rules in apply.” However, where a business is competing in a Northern Ireland, because all I hear is an effort to make sector for which there are state subventions and subsidies sure that the EU does not encroach on GB affairs in England, Scotland and Wales but where those same without any consequential understanding or recognition subsidies and subventions are precluded in Northern of—or aspiration to solve—the problems that we will Ireland, there will be discrimination. There will be an face in Northern Ireland. unfair playing field in the economy of this internal market, and that square is not circled in this Bill. There Sammy Wilson: While the Bill may state that it is up are no satisfactory answers from the Government to to the Secretary of State to notify the European say, “If we run with the implication of EU state aid Commission of any state aid, there is absolutely nothing rules in Northern Ireland, and if we support businesses to stop the Government of the Irish Republic—or in GB but not in Northern Ireland, how is there not indeed, another manufacturer who feels aggrieved that unfair competition? How are there not direct or indirect state aid has been given to firms in Northern Ireland discriminatory outworkings of the provisions of this that impinges on its ability to compete with those arrangement?” firms—taking a case to the Commission and going I want to draw the Minister’s attention to a useful through the European mechanism at that stage. Once document, which I hope he will spend time considering. that happens,we have no representatives on the Commission I refer to the Northern Ireland stakeholder response to or the Court, so it would be a one-way ticket as far as the UK’sresearch and development road map consultation, the complainant was concerned. which considers clearly some of the things the Government could do under clauses 46 and 47 in providing financial Gavin Robinson: My right hon. Friend is absolutely support for sectors in Northern Ireland. We hear an right, and I mentioned the chilling effect. Arguably, if awful lot in this Chamber about doubling down on the UK Government and officialdom in Whitehall had levelling up. We know that research and development not offered such religious observance to EU regulations support across the UK is hugely uneven, and that the over the past 40 years, this country would not have majority of that money goes into the south-east of agreed to leave the European Union. We know that of England, to London and to the east of England, and other countries in the European Union, has, en that Northern Ireland and other regions throughout the français, an à la carte approach to which regulations are UK do not get their fair share. important and which are not. The religious observance The stakeholder response is a collaborative piece of of regulations in this country has caused that chill work by Belfast City Council, Belfast Harbour, Queen’s factor and it is why people built up frustrations and University, Ulster University and Catalyst Northern resentment on the application of those regulations over Ireland. It asks that the Government ring-fence R&D the years. There is a fear that that could happen in this support, with a minimum of £250 million per year for case. Northern Ireland; that they create bespoke arrangements that allow for flexibility of funds for the Northern Let us consider the Addison Lee case on state aid Ireland economy; that they appoint regional delivery application of rules in this country. Addison Lee wanted partnerships; and that they are considering an ARPA— to use bus lanes in London, but it was told it could not advanced research projects agency—for the cyber-security use them. Addison Lee took a case on the state aid hub in my constituency, our FinTech hub, the advanced implications because it thought the state was unfairly and high-end engineering and manufacturing in my given an advantage over Addison Lee in London. The constituency, and the aspirations of a digital free port UK Government’s position was “Catch yourself on! It in Belfast. That ARPA opportunity is well worth is a UK-funded public service versus a UK private considering and it is well worth showing that even business, and EU state aid rules do not apply” but the though we may have an uneven playing field, our EU resolved that, yes, the rules were engaged because Government are serious about doubling down on levelling Addison Lee could equally have been owned by up and will extend support to Northern Ireland. representatives from another member state. That is how the question was resolved, and Addison Lee can now I would love to go through a lot of the amendments, use bus lanes. I have no doubt that the far-reaching but I am conscious that I have gone over my self-imposed implications of state aid law would open the opportunity timeline, so I will just discuss the importance of amendment for claims from elsewhere. 68, which proposes a change to clause 40. It proposes that Northern Ireland Assembly consent would be required for any new arrangements or requirements for goods Jim Shannon: To back up my hon. Friend’s argument, traded from GB to NI, and new requirements would the farming community and businesses across the whole not come into force unless they were agreed with the of Northern Ireland have expressed their great concern consent of the Assembly. It would also provide that: about the different levels of state aid. They are not only referring to food, because subsidy comes in many forms. “No additional official or administrative costs”— My constituents tell me that they are also concerned arising from new requirements— about being precluded from the tax reliefs available on “may be recouped from the private sector.” 677 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 678

[Gavin Robinson] do so, however, so I hope that he gives us some clarity as to what steps the Government are prepared to take in The Minister referred to the trader supporter service, the Finance Bill to resolve these overarching and burdening and we know that the Government have said that there issues, which remain unresolved, through the Joint are going to put £355 million into that service at this Committee. stage. Huge questions remain unanswered for businesses in Northern Ireland, which have heard that they have Sir Robert Neill: This has not been the most edifying unfettered access to the UK internal market. Some spectacle for the House of Commons over the past few understand that that promise is one way; some understand days, but I hope that, at the end of the day, we can find a that that promise is NI to GB. Some do not understand constructive way forward. I say that it is not edifying that there are huge constraints on GB to NI trade, because, although much of the purpose of the Bill is because the Government gave that power away in the important and valuable, to act in contemplation of withdrawal agreement. They passed it to the Joint something that most of us would regard as unworthy— Committee and therefore they are only half of the namely, to breach an international obligation—is not equation. Weknow that the Joint Committee is considering something that one should ever seek to discuss lightly. what goods are at risk, but businesses are trying to Equally, it is not something that can ever be an absolute, access goods in the rest of GB and their suppliers are because there can be certain extreme and pressing saying, “Are we able to send this to you? Will we be able circumstances where such a derogation is permissible, to sell you these goods? Will we be required to file exit but the bar has to be a very high one. That is why the declarations? Will there be a cost for us doing business discussions that have taken place between some of us with you in Northern Ireland, one that we are not and the Government, and the Minister’s response, are prepared to meet or you are not prepared to pay?” If important, as far as my thinking is concerned. On the that is the case, it makes a whole nonsense of this face of it, as my right hon. Friend the Member for internal UK market. Maidenhead (Mrs May) observed, without safeguards and caveats, clauses 42, 43 and 45 would without more Stephen Farry: Will the hon. Gentleman clarify for ado be unconscionable, and we could not support them. the record whether, if the amendment were to proceed I want also to speak to my amendment 4 and the and the consent of the Northern Ireland Assembly were Government’s amendment 66, which I hope will provide required, that would constitute a unilateral breach of a means of reconciling that position with the need to the protocol in how that consent would be given? Could find a constructive way forward. a petition of concern be lodged against it, thereby giving his party and anyone else—Members of Traditional Sir William Cash: Will my hon. Friend give way? Unionist Voice, for example— a veto over the way forward? Sir Robert Neill: If my hon. Friend will allow me to develop my point a little, I will of course give way to Gavin Robinson: The first aspect of that question is him in a moment. the intended breach, and the answer is clearly no, because Without a parliamentary lock, I do not believe that it amendment 68 talks about “new requirements”, and if will ever be appropriate for a sovereign Parliament to the hon. Gentleman reads the content of the amendment, contemplate breaking an international obligation. There he will see that. The Northern Ireland Assembly has has to be a test for the parliamentary lock to be met. cross-community voting mechanisms not to provide I welcome, therefore, the Minister’s comments on vetoes but to encourage consensus. The hon. Members Government amendment 66 and the test that he has on the Benches to my left know exactly why those adopted—and that was previously put out by Downing provisions were brought in, and they know the importance Street—at the Dispatch Box in respect of the high bar of them, but they tend to believe that they are worthy of that would have to be met before the House could or use only when there is an issue for which they wish to should be persuaded to support such a course of action. use them. That is hugely regrettable. When I talk about For me and, I suspect, many other Members, the bar the consent of the Northern Ireland Assembly, I know would have to be a high one. that there are cross-community mechanisms to ensure that we get to a place of consensus. I do not believe in 6.30 pm stalemate or in logjams. I have spent my political life Sir William Cash: Does my hon Friend agree that trying to resolve them. I hope that when I contribute on that bar becomes very apparent when dealing with the issues in this House, people respect the fact that, although essential question of sovereignty and whether the EU is I do not necessarily agree with everyone, I try to get to a recognising sovereignty in the negotiations in the way place where we can agree. that was clearly stated in the protocol and in the essential Businesses in Northern Ireland that buy from GB elements of the agreement? We are sovereign and our and wish to sell to GB want to know what their trading constitution is special in that respect, compared with position will be. They were promised the best of both some other countries that have provisions in written worlds, yet day after day they are learning about the constitutions. bureaucratic and administrative burdens that are going to be placed upon them. They want answers. I know Sir Robert Neill: Let me put it this way: if my hon. that the Minister will respond thoughtfully to the debate, Friend is saying that the test is something akin to that in and that he will pick up on some of the additional issues article 46 of the Vienna convention on the law of that I have raised on amendment 68. I hope he does treaties, which permits a departure from an international that. I hope he offers some clarity and comfort for obligation if the violation that causes it is businesses in Northern Ireland, and I hope he outlines “manifest and concerned a rule of its internal law of fundamental just how the Bill will assist them. I believe that it will not importance”, 679 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 680

I am not a million miles away from him. It is not an Scottish constituency Members, based on that premise, exact analogy and I do not think my hon. Friend was should walk through the Lobby and vote with the trying to make one, but it would have to be something Government? similarly fundamental. From my point of view, one could conceive—I use Sir Robert Neill: It is presumptuous, it seems to me, my words carefully—that a Government might be able of the hon. Gentleman to try to suggest how any of my to persuade the House that there was such a threat to hon. and right hon. Friends might choose to vote, just the position of Northern Ireland in the United Kingdom, as it would be presumptuous of me to take a view as to and to the welfare of its economy and people, that one why any Member does or does not remain a member of might take such a step. That is why, having thought and the Government. I have a very high respect for the noble hesitated for some time, I am prepared to allow the Lord, Lord Keen of Elie. I just observe that his resignation Government the opportunity to make that case. None came before the terms of the Government’s amendment the less, it is a high bar, and I have to say that the fact were announced and it was tabled, and before the that other jurisdictions—be it the EU or others—may declaration which the Minister has read out from the have derogated from international treaties is not of Dispatch Box was in the public domain; I perhaps itself persuasive. Many of us would need to be persuaded regret the timing of that, but I respect Lord Keen’s by the evidence that was brought in relation to the position, and that is unchanged, and I do not think specific circumstances that might trigger the bringing relevant to the case that we must make here. into force of the three clauses under the arrangements set out in Government amendment 66. That is the point Several hon. Members rose— and will be the only test that will be relevant. Sir Robert Neill: I must press on now, and not take Mr Carmichael: I have sympathy with the argument any further interventions for some time out of respect that the hon. Gentleman is making, but I have to say for others who wish to speak in this debate. that the practicalities will take us in a very different The Government now accept that they must come to direction. Last week, No. was briefing the House and make their case. I think that they recognise out that the hon. Gentleman and those who agreed with that that case would have to be a persuasive one, and him would have the Whip removed if they followed that the level of breach by the EU—which would have through on his amendment. That is the pressure under to be a breach of its obligation of good faith, which in which Government Members will be put. May I suggest turn would be a breach, it seems to me, of the obligations to the hon. Gentleman that it is possible the Government under article 26 of the Vienna convention to operate in have accepted his proposition because they see it as good faith—would have to be made out before I and something that in practice will not cause them any many others would be prepared to vote for such a difficulty? course, because of the potential consequences for our international reputation and standing. That is why I am Sir Robert Neill: I shall make two points to the right prepared to adopt the formulation of the Lord Chancellor hon. Gentleman. First, he knows my record does not that such a thing might be acceptable in extremis. This indicate that I am always in terror of voting against the is not a carte blanche for the Government, and, in Whip. Secondly, if anything like that was being briefed fairness, I do not think Ministers have ever taken it as out, I never heard it, it was never said to me and I am such; I think they know that it weighs heavily to do such shocked that any Government would brief such a thing a thing. If the Government move amendment 66 at the without saying it to the face of the Members concerned. relevant stage tomorrow, I will be prepared not to press my amendment, but it is to give the Government the chance to make their case as to why such an exceptional Rehman Chishti: I can confirm that when on the step should be necessary. Sunday I conveyed to the Government my concerns with regard to aspects of the Bill and said that on It is not wise or constructive to conflate the positions Monday I would be resigning as the Prime Minister’s of domestic and international law in this debate; they special envoy for freedom of religion or belief because operate in different spheres, and much of what we are of real concerns about aspects of the Bill, no one at all looking at would be in relation to treaty law. A test that from No. 10 ever said that the Whip would be withdrawn; is not dissimilar—although it can never be exactly the instead, they said that they understood and accepted same—to those considered in the Vienna convention is, my decision. therefore, not out of the way. I welcome, too, the fact that the Minister indicated that the measures that would be initiated would include Sir Robert Neill: That does not surprise me; it is the arbitral provisions under the protocol to the withdrawal consistent with my own experience. I say gently to agreement. To try to oust those provisions would be a Opposition Members that the issues at stake are too material breach of the agreement on our part, and serious to be part of what might otherwise be an would be unconscionable. Under certain circumstances understandable bit of partisan knockabout. That is not the timeframe for that might not be capable of being what we are talking about. resolved in such a way that we might not have to take some proportionate and temporary action ourselves to Martin Docherty-Hughes (West Dunbartonshire) (SNP): safeguard a vital interest, but I am sure the Minister The hon. Gentleman mentions the seriousness of the and the House will note that I choose my words carefully issue; it is that serious that the British Government’s in all those regards. This is not a green light to treating senior Scottish Law Officer, the Advocate General, has our international obligations lightly or cavalierly; it is resigned. Does the hon. Gentleman really believe that an opportunity for the Government to justify why it 681 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 682

[Sir Robert Neill] Claire Hanna: Do you know what? I will give way, but only once, because for a few years your party held court might be necessary. One cannot give undertakings as to here, and they were terribly damaging years for Northern what that might be until we have seen the evidence at Ireland, and it is time that the majority voice, which is the appropriate time, and I am sure the Government against these proposals, was heard. know that, too. But I hope that in practice this also has the desirable effect of enabling the negotiations to proceed Ian Paisley: I am delighted that the hon. Member has and, at the end of the day—with good faith on both given way. She casts a considerable aspersion on the sides, which I hope, underneath, is still there—we can Members of her party who were here for several years, get an agreement with the European Union and leave but who obviously did not do as good a job in the on the terms of a deal. That may not be as good as I House as she now purports to be doing, but I will leave would have liked, but much of what I have been doing that thought with her. Her party is in a coalition ever since the referendum is trying to mitigate a circumstance Government with my party and with Sinn Féin at the that I did not wish for but which I believe has to be present time—obviously her words about co-operation addressed head-on for the sake of the country. If we can will now ring very true indeed. Given that her party is in achieve an agreement, I hope these provisions will be that coalition Government with Sinn Féin, is she actually otiose and we will see no more of them. The rest of the telling the House that she believes that Sinn Féin or Bill is necessary because we need a proper and efficient others are on the cusp of going back to terrorism working of our internal market once we leave the European because of what is happening here tonight? Union. Therefore, my other motive for adopting the Claire Hanna: No, obviously I am not. Only somebody course that I have is not to obstruct the rest of the Bill with absolutely no understanding or who is so disingenuous needlessly. would ask the question of where the violence comes It is in that spirit—which has, in fairness, been reflected from as if just a hope is a good enough reason to ride in my exchanges with the Minister—that I set out the over a solemn peace treaty. Only somebody who either case for why the amendment is important to debate and misunderstands or misdirects people would ask such a to consider. If the Government are able to deliver in the disingenuous question, and ask it repeatedly. We know terms that we have discussed, I will give them the chance that unfortunately there are many people of different to make their case, if it ever be necessary, in the profound political hues who have always sought to use violence as hope that we never actually get to that. an excuse. That is why my party and others did the heavy lifting to ensure peace, while your party stood Claire Hanna (Belfast South) (SDLP): I rise to commend outside, waved placards and did everything it could to to the Committee amendments 46 to 48, amendment 41 thwart the Good Friday agreement. So I will take no and new clause 7, which stand in the name of the hon. lectures or disingenuous questions, thank you very much. Member for North Down (Stephen Farry). The Good Friday agreement did talk about democratic There has been so much invocation of the Good and agreed arrangements, the democratic process and Friday agreement, in favour and against the measures in the primacy of the rule of law. It talked about close the Bill, that I think it bears repeating some of what is co-operation as friendly neighbours and partners in the and is not contained and implied in that generation-defining EU. Each strand of the agreement has been damaged by agreement. Those who have read the agreement will the last few years, and they will be damaged further know that it does not really talk all that much about by the Bill. Strand 1, which deals with internal relationships borders, trade and internal markets, because, frankly, in Northern Ireland, is damaged by injecting these binary the EU had settled all those things, and in 1998 the choices and by trespassing into the devolved field. However, prospect of either Government choosing to leave the I will not, for reasons of time, go over the points that I security, opportunity and prosperity of the EU would and others made last Wednesday evening, about what have been considered insanity. undermining the devolved settlement might do. Violence was the reason for the continuing fortifications. Strand 2, which deals with relationships on the island The Good Friday agreement was the document that of Ireland, will be utterly undermined by the creeping articulated most clearly the argument, which had been borderism that will follow from the Bill and the disruption made by John Hume and others for so many years, that of the north-south frameworks. Strand 3 deals with the violence was neither needed nor justified. It took the east-west relationships, which clearly have been strained gun out of Irish politics and ensured that the purported almost to breaking point over the past few years. It is justification of those behind the violence was addressed. because of the primacy of relationships that barriers to The agreement was then endorsed by the people of trade and aspiration offend the Good Friday agreement. Ireland, north and south, in overwhelming numbers, Those who are seeking to say, “It isn’t written down and endorsed by both Governments, as the only way to anywhere, so there is no problem here”need to understand achieve your politics. It took away the excuse and put that. peaceful constitutional views to the fore. It meant that Unionists, nationalists and others could have their views The SDLP profoundly regrets the development of any with dignity and that we all had a decent pass forward. barrier—east-west; the border in the Irish sea—for reasons of trade and economy, but also because we understand The Good Friday agreement does not say much that borders have symbolic meaning to people, and we about borders and trade, but it does say a lot about understand that this is particularly hurtful and egregious relationships, aspirations, consensus and respect, and I to those of a Unionist or British identity. think that those are the values that unfortunately have been most damaged and will be most damaged by the We have enjoyed, for the last 20 years, interdependence Bill. The declaration that accompanied the agreement— and free movement east, west, north and south, and it is Brexit and these decisions that are forcing the choice. It Ian Paisley: Will the hon. Member give way? is not re-fighting the last campaign to remind people 683 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 684 that the problem is not the protocol, it is not the EU I bit my tongue several times during the speech from and it is not uppity Irish nationalists, but it is this the hon. Member for Belfast East (Gavin Robinson), Government’s failure to choose between a higher degree whose opinion is always considered. I bit it for a number of alignment with the EU, which offends the European of reasons. Not only because of course your party Research Group, the ability to diverge, which will upset opposed giving a consent mechanism to the Northern and offend people of a Unionist background, and the Ireland Assembly on article 50 and opposed giving nuclear option of forcing a hard border on the island of consent on the sequencing, but because you speak about Ireland. Quite clearly, the last two weeks have shown the sequencing. We have seen what has happened with and give some reassurance that the UK will have no the gamification of the sequencing and the gamification trading partners if that is the course it chooses. and using of Northern Ireland as a pawn by the UK Government in order to achieve outcomes and to justify no deal. The last thing I had to bite my tongue about 6.45 pm was your saying that the petition of concern is not used Sir Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con): as a veto. Members can look it up, but your party has The hon. Member says it is not the fault of the EU, but used it 86 times. It used it numerous times to veto, for can we just remind ourselves that it was the United example, equal marriage for absolutely no reasons of Kingdom Government who gave an absolutely cast-iron offence to the United Kingdom. guarantee that we would put up no infrastructure on the border between north and south in Ireland? It was Gavin Robinson: I think the second-last point—the the EU that kept threatening to do that, even though penultimate point—was right, and I agree with the hon. alternative arrangements could be developed to obviate Member. However, on the petition of concern and the that need. I fail to understand why people just do not cross-community voting mechanisms, she knows the want to believe that, except that they want to blame the reason they are there. She does not like it when people United Kingdom Government, not the EU. use them for reasons that she does not agree with, but she knows the reasons they are there. We were not the Claire Hanna: It is funny, but we do not hear so much only ones to use it. We do not have the power to use it about the alternative arrangements, and this from a by ourselves. But the aspiration for us all must be party that has us all queuing around the estate because building consensus. it could not put in place any alternative arrangements for voting. We heard a lot about them for a lot of years, Claire Hanna: It certainly should. I am not going to but the magic sovereignty dust that was supposed to rehearse the figures, but I believe that the Democratic solve all of our problems has not yet been produced. Unionist party used the petition of concern approximately However, it is true that the choices, and they are very two thirds of the time. You do not have the power to use difficult choices, are being forced by that Government. it now because the electorate took that power off you, We wish that the Government had picked the first of because it was wielded inappropriately so many times. I those options. We wish they had picked a higher degree am acknowledging very clearly the barriers and of alignment with the EU, but they did not, and they impediments that this will create and the intentions of cannot keep reopening the wound every time they try to many to try to address those, but whatever the value of deal with the contradictory promises they made. Whatever trade east-west—I see and acknowledge that value, but Bill the Government bring in, the choice will be the it is often cited by people who seem to know the price of same. You cannot opt out of the biggest free trade bloc everything and the value of nothing—the reality is that in the world and then feign shock when the trade is not there are more people and more units that move up and completely clear, and you cannot refuse to do the first down the island than move between the two islands. In of the two things and then pretend that they are going fact, after 1 January next year, there will be more to happen. external crossings into the EU on the island of Ireland To suggest that any of this is about protecting the than there will be in the rest of the continent’s borders. Good Friday agreement or the people of Northern Those who support the Bill and the last few years of Ireland is beyond a parody. We have worked intensively poor decision making have to acknowledge the intellectual with businesses and other parties to try to address some and moral failure in a position that says that a border of the barriers that we accept will exist, but we have to down the Irish sea is absolutely impossible technically remind the House and others that it is this Government’s and impossible to bear politically, but that somehow choice and the failure of the DUP for the last three forcing one on the island of Ireland is dead-on, that we years to do anything about those choices that has can deal with that with a bit of administration and that brought us to this point, and people must own those people are being overly sensitive. Imperfect though I decisions. The Joint Committee is the place to address acknowledge the protocol is, it is the baseline protection those difficulties and those operational issues, and there against the border,so repudiation of the protocol therefore are the dispute mechanisms. makes a border a lot more likely, and inevitable. We see and we very much acknowledge the anxiety I agree with the right hon. Member for Maidenhead that east-west barriers to trade create, but even with the (Mrs May)—we believe that the clauses we are dealing politics and the identity issues stripped out, it is a with today are irredeemable—and I appreciate her regrettable fact that the sea border is more practical and interventions very much. Over the few years that she more manageable than a border across the island of served as Prime Minister, while I frequently did not Ireland, given that there are three such points of entry agree with what she said, I could always acknowledge into Northern Ireland and 108 border crossings between that she was trying to respect the sensitivities. I respect the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. I do not those who are trying to manoeuvre their party to the say that to be hurtful; I say it because it is true. right place. I know that that is a very difficult thing to 685 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 686

[Claire Hanna] close to the wind. I just say to all Members present that there are still a lot of people on the call list. The closer do, particularly when 21 decent MPs were sacked for to five minutes the speeches are, the more of our colleagues refusing to vote for the previous Bill, and now they will will be able to contribute to the debate. be sacked if they do vote for the withdrawal agreement—I think that is the sequencing of things. Theresa Villiers (Chipping Barnet) (Con): I will bear The amendments that we have tabled seek to protect your comments on timing in mind, Sir Graham, and try the protocol and put the commitment to the Good to rattle through. It is a pleasure to follow a very Friday agreement into the Bill. While I appreciate the powerful speech from the hon. Member for Belfast Minister’s words, my hon. Friend the Member for Foyle South (Claire Hanna). We may disagree on some quite (Colum Eastwood) has made it clear that the words do fundamental things, but I very much welcome her input not mean anything if you refuse the opportunity to give to this debate. it legislative effect. Amendment 47 tries to put in place I rise to support the Bill and the Government an understanding and an assurance that all of the Bill’s amendments, because we need to ensure that goods and operation will be compatible with all the legislation that trade can flow freely across our United Kingdom without underpins the Good Friday agreement. While the UK’s unnecessary barriers. I see regaining control of how we intention is clear—I accept what it is trying to do, but I regulate our economy as one of the key benefits of think it is doing it inappropriately and I do not think it Brexit. That is not because I want any kind of race to will work—it is about rejecting EU jurisdiction, and the the bottom. I want to maintain high standards. In some fact is that because of the international treaty that is the areas, there is clearly a case for introducing more rigorous Good Friday agreement, international law has jurisdiction regulation, for example to bring an end to the live in Northern Ireland. That is welcome, and the rights export of animals for slaughter or fattening, but regaining and safeguards in the equality of opportunity section of domestic control over regulation will enable us to produce the Good Friday agreement confirmed the incorporation rules that are more targeted and more effective at tackling of the convention on human rights into Northern Ireland the problem they are designed to address, and which we law, with direct access to the courts and remedies for can update more quickly as circumstances change. All breach of the convention, including power for the courts those could be crucial in improving our global to overrule Assembly legislation on grounds of consistency. competitiveness, and in supporting jobs and growth That point is echoed again in strand 1 of the agreement, during this time of grave economic damage caused by and it must be very clear that my party, certainly, could covid-19. not and would not have signed up to the Good Friday I spent six years in the European Parliament before agreement without those commitments, but this Bill coming to this place and I was heavily involved in casts them into the wind. debates on the creation of new EU regulation. I spent It is clear that we are not talking about narrow and nearly two years of my life on the markets in financial specific breaches. These are going to be open-ended and instruments directive. I can say, from seeing the process unchecked powers, and there will not be any qualifications at first hand, that it is long and painful to produce EU or consultations to test their basis. I sought assurances legislation, and that it frequently produces outcomes on Wednesday night from the Minister that there would that are inflexible, bureaucratic, heavy-handed and create be limits to the powers, and I did not receive that unnecessary costs. I believe that in this House and in assurance. this nation, we can do better. We can deliver a regulatory Members may think that this is all a big game of system that is more responsive, more agile and more chicken, or a negotiating strategy or whatever with the proportionate. EU. I urge them to remember the words of the late John As we have heard from many speakers, and as we well Hume, a former Member of this House, who said very know from the debate over the past year, the Northern clearly, “Victories are not solutions”. The agreement Ireland protocol will inevitably have an impact on the that he designed talked about the obligations of the flow of goods across the Irish sea. That was one of the British and Irish Governments to promote the harmonious most painful compromises that was made in reaching and mutually beneficial relationships between the peoples agreement on the withdrawal treaty. Certainly for me of these islands. I dearly hope that that can somehow that was one of the things I found most difficult in still be our future. We are all in the business of trying to deciding whether I could support it. However, there can deliver solutions for our constituents. I appreciate that be no doubt that the Government are pressing ahead some of you are trying to deliver a Brexit and your with implementing the protocol. Extensive preparations Brexit deal, however ill-advised I think that is. I am have been made by the UK Government for a new trying to deliver stability and reconciliation in Northern system for compliance with both customs and sanitary Ireland, but I believe your Bill prevents both of us from and phytosanitary obligations, as required by the protocol. proceeding. It is simply not true to allege that the Government, with this proposed legislation, are somehow ripping up the Several hon. Members rose— protocol or repudiating the treaty. What we cannot do is let the European Union run The Temporary Chair (Sir Graham Brady): Order. I down the clock on securing agreement on the scope of did not interrupt the hon. Lady, but I would just like to the key concept of goods at risk of being re-exported to remind Members, especially new ones, that if you say the EU, because that would mean a default would kick “your”, as in “your party”, it is a reference to my party, in requiring customs compliance for all goods coming and it was not my party. Also, I remind people to use from Great Britain to Northern Ireland. That, of course, temperate language when they can. There were just one would lead to a full customs border between Northern or two instances where the hon. Lady was sailing a little Ireland and Great Britain, violating article 4 of the 687 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 688 protocol. It would also change the status of Northern someone who is usually a gradualist and who will bank Ireland within the UK, contrary to the provisions of the progress, but this is not that type of situation. This will Belfast agreement. not convince anybody of the UK’s good intentions. In Concern about the potential for the EU to adopt essence, the threat to breach international law will still an unreasonable and absolutist approach to the question of be codified in the legislation and that is not a basis on goods at risk is, frankly,compounded by the Commission’s which any state can do business internationally. It will current refusal to list the UK as a country is deemed fit undermine the ability of the UK to manage its existing to export food to the EU. As Environment Secretary, I agreements, and also to conclude future agreements. was able to secure that authorisation in the event that The reputation of the UK internationally will fall with we had left at the end of January without an exit treaty, very serious consequences. Our ability to hold other but I have to say that it was not an easy process. The regimes to account for breaches of democracy, human UK’s compliance with all current EU laws, including on rights and the rule of law will be compromised; and the food and animals, should mean that giving us third UK does have a strong record in that regard, or at least country status is a straightforward administrative decision, had a strong record up until this particular point in so it is therefore very hard to understand why the EU is time. withholding consent, for example, for us to export More specifically, part 5 will undermine the ability of products to the European Union, which it permits from the UK to conclude a future relationship arrangement countries with which it has far weaker links and which with the European Union. That will have severe have, arguably, far less rigorous standards. They include, consequences for the UK economy. To me, it seems as if to take just a few, Russia, Serbia, Chile, Thailand, a dead-end approach is being adopted by those who Ukraine and Cuba. Even the Republic of Iran is on the claim to want such a deal, and I am not quite sure how approved list for certain products. that will be a sustainable position. Even beyond that, the prospects of a US-UK trade 7 pm deal are very much called into question. For those who In these circumstances, I can support the precautions have the fantasy of an Atlanticist approach to replace taken in clauses 41 to 45 to allow Ministers to make the relationship with our nearest neighbour, I really decisions on how aspects of the protocol will operate in struggle to understand how they believe that the approach practice if these important matters cannot be resolved they are taking will actually allow that dream to be in the Joint Committee. I honestly think that these realised. Of course, we should all want a deal with the clauses are unlikely ever to be used, but what they can United States, albeit one that we negotiate from a do is prevent the EU from being able to use article 5 position of strength—people have some genuine concerns provisions to exert leverage over the United Kingdom about that—but I am not sure that people fully appreciate to try to lock us into its regulatory orbit, bound by its whow difficult that will be, particularly in terms of laws and its Court. Congress and what Speaker Pelosi and indeed some members of the Republican party have said. This is an Leaving the European Union does not mean becoming ultimate dead end, and Members who still believe it is a client state of the European Union. That is why I doable need to reflect very seriously on what has been voted three times against the first version of the withdrawal said to them. treaty, and that is why I am backing this Bill in the I will also comment on what I think is a major Lobby this evening. misunderstanding, or lack of understanding, in some parts of the House with respect to the Good Friday Stephen Farry: It is a pleasure to follow the right hon. agreement. At times, I get the sense that the Government Member for Chipping Barnet (Theresa Villiers). Although are almost twisting the understanding of the Good I fundamentally disagree with her on Brexit, I certainly Friday agreement to fit their particular political objectives. recognise her work in Northern Ireland when she was It is important that Members understand that a fault Secretary of State. I refer, in particular, to her work on line runs right through Northern Ireland. Anyone familiar the Stormont House agreement, though I think it is with history will well appreciate why I am saying that. worth noting that that is another agreement that the Northern Ireland is both a divided society and a contested Government are in the process of breaching as well. space, particularly with regard to the latter in that there I primarily want to speak to the amendments of are different constitutional aspirations for the future of which I am the lead sponsor—amendment 41 and new that part of the world. We have been on a journey clause 6—but also to make wider reference to part 5 of through the Good Friday agreement, but the work of the Bill. In brief, amendment 41 seeks to ensure that building integration and promoting reconciliation is everything in part 5 is consistent with international law still very much in progress. More needs to be done. obligations and also with the Good Friday agreement in It is true—this is where the Government are placing all of its parts, though it would be preferable to strike all their emphasis—that the principle of consent is a clauses 42 to 45 from the Bill in their entirety, but, at core aspect of the agreement. I concur with that, and this stage, amendment 41 is a catch-all to try to ensure indeed it is recognised fundamentally within the withdrawal that it is compliant insofar as that is possible. New agreement, although people may have different aspirations clause 6 is about putting into law the correct approach regarding where that goes in due course. However, the to addressing the issue of export declarations and other agreement is also about the interlocking relationships, exit procedures in terms of trying to get a good resolution the internal dynamics in Northern Ireland, the north-south through the Joint Committee. relationship and the east-west relationship, and the I want to make some general comments about the wider context of the improvement of Anglo-Irish relations, threat to international law that is contained in part 5 of which gave rise to the agreement in the first place and the Bill and to echo that the Government amendment is which, up until now, have been working to try to ensure essentially cosmetic. It does not address the issue. I am that the agreement stays on course. 689 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 690

Paul Girvan (South Antrim) (DUP): Will the hon. and red lines on Brexit, so if there are concerns, grumbles Member give way? or complaints about it, it is a product of decisions taken primarily by people in this Chamber over the past Stephen Farry: Yes. number of years. In essence, there is a trilemma at the heart of this: the The Temporary Chair (Sir Graham Brady): Order. It UK set out three mutually incompatible objectives, only is not possible to speak from those Benches. The hon. two of which can be realised at any one time. The first Gentleman must find another place in the Chamber. was that there would be an open border on the island of Ireland, the second was that the whole of the UK would Paul Girvan: Thank you, Sir Graham. The hon. Member leave the customs union and single market, and the mentioned the protectionism in the Belfast agreement. third was that special measures for Northern Ireland That is its name: the Belfast agreement. Unfortunately, were ruled out. The first has been a given for the best from a Unionist perspective, the protections that we part of four years, and was rightly recognised at the were sold as ensuring and enshrining our right to be start of the Brexit negotiations. The second was the part of the United Kingdom until such time as the determination of this House, which ruled out a softer people of Northern Ireland decided otherwise are being version of Brexit, with the entire UK remaining part of eroded from below our feet by the withdrawal agreement the customs union and single market—an outcome that and the clause associated with Northern Ireland. That would still have been consistent with the referendum has to be recognised. Do you recognise, as a Unionist, result. The third is something that the UK has essentially that this does not give you much comfort? had to concede through the protocol. Whatever way we look at this, when a decision was Stephen Farry: I am grateful to the hon. Member for taken to leave the customs union and single market, his intervention. I think his question was aimed at me, some sort of interface was going to have to be managed rather than you, Sir Graham. First, just to give Members with the European Union’s single market and customs some encouragement, Members from Northern Ireland union. The backstop was the first attempt—I believe it can sort out some choreography at times in terms of was much maligned and a missed opportunity. The speaking, so all is not lost entirely, but it is important protocol was the next alternative, and the Prime Minister that the hon. Member appreciates a number of points. bought into it last October. It is an attempt to square an As I said, the principle of consent is hard-wired into impossible circle, but we have to do our best in that the withdrawal agreement. At the same time, however, I regard; there will not be a neat and easy solution. The think it is naive not to accept that what had been a protocol is imperfect, but it represents the bare minimum relatively stable situation in Northern Ireland around of what is required to address the particular challenges the constitutional question has become much more and circumstances that Northern Ireland faces. fluid in recent years, to a large extent because of the Like the hon. Member for Belfast South (Claire fallout from Brexit. Whichever way things emerge over Hanna), I do not want to see any borders anywhere the coming months there will be some degree of political inside these islands, but we have to face the reality that instability in that respect, and it is incumbent on us all some line will have to be drawn on a map, and wherever to try to come to terms with that, to manage that and to it is, some political, emotional and psychological keep people on board, making Northern Ireland work implications will arise from it. It is easier to manage that over the months and years to come. down the Irish sea than on a land border, as a purely I also stress to the hon. Member that another way of pragmatic analysis of the situation. As has been said, looking at the agreement is that it was, in essence, a there are seven crossings down the Irish sea, and potentially grand bargain. We are approaching the centenary of more than 200 on the land border. People talk about the Northern Ireland next year. For most of its history, value of east-west trade, and I certainly recognise that, Northern Ireland was a contested state and some people but the counterpoint to that is to recognise the sheer did not accept its legitimacy. We had a situation, for number of movements on the island of Ireland. The example, where the Irish constitution had a claim on the opportunity to have some degree of regulation is more territory of Northern Ireland through articles 2 and 3. readily applied on the Irish sea interface because there With the Good Friday agreement, arguably for the is more dead time, in terms of air and sea travel, than first time we had a sense that the vast majority of there is on the land border, with land-based transport people on the island of Ireland accepted the legitimacy and much more just-in-time delivery. Those are the sad of Northern Ireland as an entity, albeit with the ability choices that we are being asked to face up to in Northern to change recognised as part of that agreement. That Ireland. was a major win, particularly for Unionism. At the We need to make the protocol as light touch as we same time, there was a recognition of the interlocking can to move from what is essentially a solid line on a relationships—in particular, the north-south aspect—on map to a dotted line. We need to work through the Joint the island of Ireland. The problem is that Brexit has Committee to address the outstanding issues and agree come in and destabilised that. In particular I have to say the future relationship. That would make the application to my Unionist colleagues that their charge headlong of the protocol much easier. To make progress in both into Brexit, given that grand bargain, was most irresponsible respects, the UK has to build up the trust and confidence and short-sighted. of the European Union. Essentially, the UK is asking It would not have been possible for the Good Friday the EU to take it on trust that certain procedures that agreement to be concluded if the UK and Ireland were would otherwise be rigorously required under the terms not simultaneously part of the European Union—in of the protocol can be disapplied, with flexibilities and particular, the customs union and the single market. modifications shown. The situation with the UK threatening The protocol is a product of the UK’s decisions, choices to breach the very withdrawal agreement that gives rise 691 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 692 to the protocol will not give the European Union confidence withdrawal agreement, should the agreement end up that the UK will honour any flexibilities that it chooses damaging the settlement. That was quite clear. In fact, to grant through the protocol. it was so clear that when the 2020 Act had passed both New clause 6 sets out perhaps one example of the Houses, interestingly the EU still went ahead and ratified type of situation I am referring to. In essence, the its end of the agreement through the European Parliament, protocol reflects the fact that Northern Ireland remains knowing full well that that was in the Act. If the EU part of the UK’s customs territory, but the EU customs disagreed with that provision or disagreed with the code is applied down the Irish sea. That was the principle, it should not have ratified the treaty at its end, compromise—I stress that—worked out last year by the but it made no bones about it and did it. Prime Minister, among others. The effect of clauses 40 to 45 is just to protect the basic implementation of the UK’s internal market in 7.15 pm terms of its constitution. I recognise the concerns of my The EU is entitled to police the integrity of a single colleagues in Northern Ireland about the application of market and customs union and to determine how that state aids in Northern Ireland as well, but in this case takes place. However, I firmly believe we can obtain the the provisions allow state aids in Great Britain to be forgoing of export declarations and other export procedures dispensed under the framework devised in this country, through discussions in the Joint Committee, if there is and not elsewhere. It seems intolerable to me that we that degree of confidence. It should be possible to agree should leave the EU only to find that it has hold of us in a situation where those things are disapplied entirely, or a number of ways that, as my right hon. Friend the some alternative statistical method to work out what is Member for Chipping Barnet (Theresa Villiers) said, actually moving into Great Britain, or indeed some were categorically never the intention. method of differentiating between Northern Ireland I do not believe that the Bill actually breaks international urgent goods and urgent goods for elsewhere on the treaties, particularly not at this stage. I think article 46 island of Ireland or further afield. All that is eminently in the Vienna convention on the law of treaties is clear doable. about that. These things are always open to interpretation In the same way—Members have alluded to this —I accept that—and different lawyers will take different coming back in the Finance Bill—the issue of goods at views, but generally I think that at this stage in particular risk moving from Great Britain into Northern Ireland the Bill does not do that. My hon. Friend the Member can be addressed through the Joint Committee. The for Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill) was default—I stress that it is the default—is that all goods clear that that was one of the reasons he is prepared to at this stage will be treated as at risk. Obviously, we have go along and accommodate the Government on this to reduce that as far as possible, and ideally to zero, and point, and that is quite reasonable. put in place different measures, but once again that has The combined effect of article 4 of the withdrawal to be done through goodwill being built up. agreement and section 7A of the European Union My plea to Members is to not go down the line of (Withdrawal) Act 2018 is that key parts of the withdrawal breaching international law.That is entirely self-defeating, agreement and the NIP are already part of domestic counterproductive and will not only undermine our law.That therefore makes it impossible for the Government, position in terms of Northern Ireland, but will also do should they see that the EU is not acting in good faith huge damage to the UK’s economy and standing in the at this point, to ensure that there is, in a sense, a world. backstop. I raised a point with the hon. Member for Sheffield Sir Iain Duncan Smith: I am conscious that everyone Central (Paul Blomfield) earlier about the EU’s behaviour needs to get in, so I will try to be as brief as possible. in this. My point was not, “Look, the EU doesn’t Most of the things I will say have probably already been always recognise international law, as applied internally, said and certainly will be said in the course of the and therefore we shouldn’t.” That was not the point. debate. I make no claim to uniqueness. The point I was making was that we talk a lot about I rise to support the Government’s Bill with particular trust, and there is a lot of debate here about trust, with reference to clauses 40 to 45, which we are considering people saying, “The UK will lose all trust should it do today. After all, the free flow of goods and trade in the this; no one will ever trust us again”—I do not believe a UK is critical and is part of the constitutional settlement— word of that, by the way,because so many other countries, the settlements between Ireland and GB and, later, including the UK, have previously breached international Northern Ireland and, earlier, Scotland and England. law, for lots of good reasons—but the EU binds it in Those principles are at the core of what we believe and that it is its right to breach international law. what we consider to be immutable, and therefore they That was very clear, as I said earlier, in Kadi v. cannot be changed. There are areas in the protocol that, Council and Commission in 2008. The Advocate General if improperly used, could affect those principles, and made it very clear that the EU does not necessarily have that cannot be allowed. to bind into international treaties with direct effect if I remind colleagues that in the European Union they clash with its constitutional settlement. They do so (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020—nobody seems to time and again, which has given us a very long list of have referenced this—our potential intentions were very occasions when the EU has done just that and refused clear in section 38, which was part of the legislation to implement all or part of international treaties. I do when it was passed. As I recall, the Opposition did not not extol its virtues in that regard; I simply regard that vote against that provision. If that was the case, it sent a as a reality. very strong signal to the EU that there was every What does that say? Does the rest of the world say likelihood that we considered that constitutional settlement that the EU cannot be trusted in international agreements? in the UK to be above the implementation of the So far, apparently not. So far, it has done deals with a 693 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 694

[Sir Iain Duncan Smith] the debate between my hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst and the Government, they number of different countries and not one of them has have tabled amendment 66, which will give Parliament a said, “Wedon’t trust you, because you breach international chance to say yea or nay when the moment comes. But law,” which it does. But the UK has also breached we are not in breach until we decide to implement this. international law. In fact, it was a Labour Government This has been done before. It is important to show that that refused to implement, in about 2005, as I recall, we want to do this if necessary, but we would rather find prisoners’ voting rights, which came directly from the an agreement between the parties. European Court of Human Rights. All that happened was that the Government said no. It took 10 years I come back to the point that I made about good before that was resolved. It was not resolved because faith in principle. I see that Monsieur Barnier has the UK Government—I think at that stage it was a threatened our negotiators that, if they do not agree Conservative Government and my right hon. Friend with him—he has not, by the way, wanted to move the Member for Maidenhead (Mrs May) was Prime anywhere near the Joint Committee to discuss these Minister—implemented it. No, they negotiated again matters—the EU will, if necessary, not give us the over its implementation and observance, and came up status of third country. That seems a bizarre threat to with a fudge. make. The list of third countries, which my right hon. Friend the Member for Chipping Barnet (Theresa Villiers) That is the point about international law: it is not mentioned, is long and peculiar. Belarus, for example, always directly applicable by the letter. Ultimately, when which we watch almost nightly on the television, would it is not agreed that things should be brought in, they have third country status. Wewould not have it, apparently. require negotiation subsequently. That is why I say that Others include the Central African Republic, China, my right hon. Friends in the Government are absolutely the Islamic Republic of Iran—the list goes on. I think right to use these clauses of the Bill to make it clear to there are now 137 countries that would have third the European Union that, should it wish to pursue the country status, but apparently to Mr Barnier, it would line that it does not agree to work hard in the Joint be quite acceptable for a country that has been very Committee to resolve these matters about application, close to the EU for years to not have third country which are always a problem, the UK still reserves its status. I think it is a hollow threat, but it is a peculiar right not to breach its own constitutional settlement, threat to make, and it gives an indication of bad faith. which is a primary cause of most breaches of international law around the world. The EU is meant to avoid bad faith in this, and so are we. The whole idea of the Bill is to say, “Stop. Let’s Mr Harper: I intervene only because the prisoner consider this again. We do not want—and you should voting issue is one that I remember very well, because I not want—to end up in a situation where we are running was then the Minister responsible for that policy area. around on your laws. This is not what the agreement Indeed, our friend David Cameron, who was then the was meant to be, and we are not prepared to see our Prime Minister, made it clear in his interview last week constitutional settlement trashed in the pursuit of your that his view is not as firm as some former Prime own vainglorious idea that somehow you’re going to Ministers, because he recognises that there are these keep hold of us and run us afterwards.” As my right clashes. His point was that we should not break our hon. Friend said, we did not vote to be a subsidiary commitments as a first course, but that having that as a state; we voted for independence. That is the key point. backstop, with parliamentary control, is actually something worth considering. The example that my right hon. I am going to vote for this Bill, and I vote for it with a Friend gave is a very sound one. clean heart. I vote for it because so many areas—from state aid, to transfer of goods and agriproducts to Sir Iain Duncan Smith: That is why I gave way to my labelling—will be affected unnecessarily.If the EU seriously right hon. Friend—because he was there. I think he was wants to help and to get this done, it needs to return to a very good Minister too, by the way, for what it is the table, go into the Joint Committee as it said it would worth. and accept what we are saying: we will not allow our The point is that for 10 years, Labour Governments constitution to become the prisoner of an EU that and other Governments simply refused to put prisoners’ wants to have all power over the UK. voting rights through. Finally,there was a fudge negotiation, where not all of what was asked for was agreed, but it was agreed that what had been done, I think on Joanna Cherry: I rise to speak in favour of furlough—as I recall, prisoners on furlough had voting amendments 43 and 44, in my name, and to support the rights—was okay. That was not what was asked for. amendments tabled by the Scottish National party, our Let us not be too pompous about this idea that friends from the SDLP and our friend from the Alliance international law is some God-given gospel that says, party. “Absolutely nobody can ever trespass away from I will focus my comments on my amendments, which this.” Many of these things are fudged anyway, and I tabled to work out just how far this Government are implementation is very important. I come back to section 38, prepared to go in ousting the jurisdiction of the domestic which my hon. Friend the Member for Stone (Sir William courts in relation to judicial review and review under Cash) initiated. That made it very clear that we would, the Human Rights Act in clause 45, as it appears on the if necessary, place our constitutional law ahead of both face of the Bill. I also wish to highlight, as I mentioned of those. in an intervention on the Minister, that, in so far as I make that point because in truth, we are now clause 45 seeks to restrict judicial review in Scotland by in exactly that state. That is why I believe that I can circumscribing the supervisory jurisdiction of the Court happily vote for this tonight. I am happy that, following of Session, this not only trespasses into devolved territory 695 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 696 but may well breach another treaty: the treaty of Union Sir William Cash: Will the hon. and learned Lady between Scotland and England, article 19 of which give way? preserves the independence of the Scottish legal system. Before I address my amendments in detail, for the Joanna Cherry: No, I am not going to give way. avoidance of doubt, my primary position—and I find It simply does not work that way: Britannia does not myself curiously on the same ground as the right hon. rule the waves any longer and has not done so for some Member for Maidenhead (Mrs May)—is that clauses 41 time. to 45 should not stand part of the Bill. Everything we heard from the right hon. Member for Chingford and I regret to say that while I have the greatest respect Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith) was designed and the highest regard for the hon. Member for Bromley to hide from us the fact that we are talking about a and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill), the Government bilateral treaty that was entered into by the Prime amendment that his efforts have secured is wholly Minister and the United Kingdom less than a year ago, inadequate to meet both domestic and international to deal with a specific situation that arose between the concerns about this Bill. I cannot do much better than United Kingdom and the European Union; and the repeat what the Irish Foreign Minister said this afternoon: most controversial part of that treaty—the one dealing a Government with an 80-seat majority having a with Northern Ireland and the north of Ireland—is the parliamentary lock is not much of a reassurance to any one that this Government are seeking to drive a coach of us. I really do not think I need to say any more than and horses through. That is what we are talking about, that. Once more, we have a ruse to solve the problems of and that is what is so wrong. the Conservative party rather than a ruse to address our international legal obligations. Sir William Cash: Will the hon. Lady give way? My amendments 43 and 44, as I said, seek to deal with clause 45. The English Bar Council and the Law Joanna Cherry: I will make some progress. Society of England and Wales have said of clause 45 that it Such excuses as those that the Government’s Law Officers who remain in post have sought to make for “would exclude judicial review of any regulations made under clauses 42 and 43 on grounds of incompatibility with domestic this do not stand up. I am very proud, as a member of … the Scottish Bar, that Lord Keen of Elie resigned last law as well as international law.” week, and I am proud of the reasons he gave for his That exclusion of judicial review would also mean resignation. The only thing I would say to him is, “What excluding any human rights review under the Human took you so long, Richard?”, but apart from that I am Rights Act or, indeed, the Equality Act 2010. As my very proud. I think it will be very difficult for the British hon. Friend the Member for Belfast South (Claire Hanna) Government to find anybody of suitable seniority from said in her very eloquent speech, human rights are of the Scottish Bar to step into his shoes, but I am waiting course integral to the Good Friday agreement. It is a with some amusement to see who they might find. travesty that regulations made under clauses 42 and 43 should not be subject to judicial review or to human rights review across Great Britain, but a particular 7.30 pm travesty in Northern Ireland. It undermines not just the Talking of rather less senior lawyers than Lord Keen principle of the rule of law but the principle of access to of Elie, the English Attorney General has said that the justice. It also contravenes article 4 of the withdrawal English doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty means agreement, which the British Government freely signed that it is lawful for the United Kingdom to override the up to, in which they undertook to ensure a right for obligations signed up to in the withdrawal agreement. I individuals to rely directly on withdrawal agreement think that that is what the right hon. Member for provisions. Chingford and Woodford Green was saying when he It is difficult to be certain how the courts would referred to section 28 of the EU (Withdrawal) Act. This interpret an ouster clause such as clause 45, but precedent idea that the English doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty suggests that it would be quite hard for them to uphold somehow trumps international law is legally illiterate. It it unless it is expressed in unequivocal terms. My is what we would call at the Scottish Bar— amendments seek to clear this up. Amendment 43 would exclude the Human Rights Act and the European Sir William Cash: Will the hon. and learned Lady convention on human rights from the definition of give way? domestic and international law, and amendment 44 would ensure that Joanna Cherry: No, I am going to make some progress. “nothing in Clause 45 ousts the jurisdiction of domestic courts in It is what we would call at the Scottish Bar a load of respect of judicial review of regulations made under Clauses 42 old mince. That is not just my view; as I said in an and 43.” intervention, it is the view of the United Kingdom Subsequent to my tabling those amendments, the Supreme Court, which said in the first Miller case, at Government tabled amendments 64 and 65, which appear paragraph 55, that to acknowledge that judicial review claims could still be “treaties between sovereign states have effect in international law brought in certain limited circumstances. I am interested and are not governed by the domestic law of any state.” to hear from the Minister what those circumstances I am terribly sorry to disappoint Conservative Members, would be. Do they include the normal judicial review but no matter how much they love their doctrine of grounds of illegality,irrationality or procedural impropriety, parliamentary sovereignty—no matter how much it means or will they also include review on the grounds of to them—it cannot trump the obligations freely entered human rights? I look forward to hearing from him into by their Government under international law. on that. 697 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 698

[Joanna Cherry] from having their way. Well, the Scots are pretty sick of this Parliament preventing Scotland from having My final point is the most important point from a its way. Scottish point of view. In so far as clause 45 seeks to interfere with judicial review in Scotland, it is interfering Martin Docherty-Hughes: From a historical perspective, with a rather different beast from judicial review in my hon. and learned Friend may agree that we need to England: the inherent supervisory jurisdiction of the go back to the 15th or 16th century, because this is a Court of Session in Edinburgh. In doing that, it strays modern-day English reformation that seeks to impose into devolved territory and would therefore require a in Scotland a modern-day Brexit prayer book. The Kirk legislative consent motion, which I very much doubt rejected it then and Scotland will reject it now. would be forthcoming. Put simply,the Scottish Parliament is not in the business of ousting the court’s jurisdiction Joanna Cherry: That is correct, and it is worrying to on judicial review or human rights grounds—nor should hear my hon. Friend talk about the Kirk as he and I it be and neither should this Parliament. were both brought up in the opposite persuasion, but of Most importantly from a Scottish point of view, the course the Church of Scotland is also protected by the supervisory jurisdiction of the Court of Session is an treaty of Union. So Members on the Government Benches inherent jurisdiction, which is not conferred on it by can mock away; they should feel free to continue their legislation but has been there since its inception in 1532. mocking, which is seen in Scotland, and simply feeds It therefore predates the treaty of Union between Scotland the desire for Scotland to go a different way. They and England in 1707. Legislation seeking to narrow the should keep up the mocking, because it is helping my scope of that inherent jurisdiction risks falling foul of party’s cause and it is helping the cause of my country. article 19 of the treaty of Union, which preserves the independence of Scotland’s legal system. Karen Bradley: It is an honour to rise today in this In Scotland, rather to our surprise, we learned from debate,following a number of very thoughtful contributions the UK Supreme Court that putting the Sewel convention from right hon. and hon. Members across the Chamber. on a legal footing did not protect us from the Government Although it is an honour to be called to speak today, I driving a coach and horses through it. As the legal cannot pretend that it is an enjoyable experience, and position stands in the United Kingdom, it seems that that is because of the conflict that I feel. I feel desperately the Government can get away with passing primary uncomfortable. I want to support the Prime Minister legislation that interferes in devolved matters without a and the Government, and I know how the Minister legislative consent motion. A breach of article 19 of the feels. I have sat on that Front Bench far too many times, treaty of Union might be a different matter, however, knowing that people behind me did not agree with my because the question of whether parts of the treaty are position. so fundamental that they cannot be overridden by an I want to support the Prime Minister. I want to see Act of this Parliament has been considered by courts the whole United Kingdom leave the European Union, north and south of the border, but never entirely resolved. respecting the referendum result, but I am desperately I simply remind Members that the doctrine of the uncomfortable about being asked to vote to break supremacy of Parliament is an English doctrine. Even international law. My instinct tells me that what the Dicey, the great high priest of parliamentary sovereignty, Government are asking me to vote for tonight is not the was prepared to recognise that those who framed the right thing to do or, to be charitable, may not be doing treaty of Union between Scotland and England believed things in the right way. in the possibility of creating an absolute sovereign The Government have been clear—they are on the legislature that was still bound by certain unalterable record—that paragraph (5) is a breach of the withdrawal laws. Many of us in Scotland believe that one of the agreement, and we are angels dancing on the head of unalterable laws of the treaty of Union is that this the pin as to when the law is broken. The law will be Parliament cannot interfere with the inherent jurisdiction broken, if these clauses are used. It might be at Royal of the Court of Session. Assent, or it might be at commencement of the Act. It Both those problems—the in-roads into the devolved might be when the order is laid after the parliamentary competence and the undermining of article 19 of vote—I thank the Government for agreeing to respect the treaty of Union—will continue, notwithstanding that and for agreeing to that amendment. I would like Government amendments 64 and 65. I suspect that the to hear from the Minister exactly what the Government’s Government have not really thought about that because, position is now as to when the law will be broken, let us be honest, they do not often think about the because no parliamentarian wants to walk through the impact on Scotland of what they want to do. Many Lobby knowing they are about to break the law. people in Scotland, including my fellow members of the Much has been made of the role that respecting the legal profession, will see that as another example of the Belfast Good Friday agreement has in this debate. Let Government’s total disregard for devolution and for us be clear: the Belfast Good Friday agreement was the Scotland’s separate and distinct institutions. result of great statecraft and the power of words over That is yet another reason why for Scotland the only violence, but it was also a triumph of compromise—or, way out of the mess that the Conservative and Unionist as I used to be told I had to call it, accommodation. It party has created over Europe is independence. I am was a settlement that meant that people living in Northern glad that so many more people in Scotland are realising Ireland could be comfortable in their own identities, be that daily. [Interruption.] It is a terrible dreadful bore that British, Irish, both or neither. As the hon. Member for Conservative Members, but I remind them that we for Belfast South (Claire Hanna) said earlier, it was spend an awful lot of time listening to them bang on written at a point when both the UK and Ireland were about the European Union and how it prevents them members of the EU. I want to be absolutely clear: the 699 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 700

Belfast Good Friday agreement was not contingent on who identifies as Irish and lives in Northern Ireland. I our both being members of the European Union. It was want them to stay part of the United Kingdom, but a result of great statecraft, compromise and people they identify as Irish. They are perfectly allowed to do being prepared to lead, and it would have happened if so—the agreement says that they can—but I want them both countries had not been members of the same to be part of the Union. If we as Unionists want people economic bloc. But the fact that both countries were to remain in the Union we need to talk about the power EU members meant that the foundations of the Belfast and benefits of the Union. We need to talk about those Good Friday agreement—the Northern Ireland Act shared institutions such as the NHS and, dare I even say, 1998 that this House passed—were written without the the BBC, which are respected and make people proud. need to deal explicitly with matters that European citizenship We have to talk about our international reputation. and membership conferred. There was no need to write We have a permanent seat on the Security Council. We about citizens’ rights and how somebody who identifies are full members of many international bodies. We as Irish and lives in Northern Ireland can exercise their punch above our weight. What the UK is known for, right to be a member of the European Union when the and what people whom I want to stay in the United country in which they reside is no longer a member of Kingdom want to see, is our respecting the rule of law. the European Union. It did not go into the points on We need to be on the highest moral ground. There customs and declarations. It did not talk about that cannot be ambiguity. Protecting our Union is the most because it did not need to. In fact, the reason we have important thing to me, but we cannot do so in a way the Bill—and I want to make it clear that I support the that alienates people and damages our reputation. Bill as a whole; it is part 5 with which I have a problem— is because we need it, as the settlements on devolution Martin Docherty-Hughes: On the reputation of the were written at a time when we were a member of United Kingdom and the identity of Irishness and the European Union. We did not need frameworks Britishness in Northern Ireland, why was it up to Emma on agriculture, because matters that will be settled by DeSouza to drag the right hon. Member’s Government the devolved Administrations were governed by rules through the courts fully to exercise their rights to identify in Brussels. as Irish and their rights as a European Union citizen in I support our taking back control of those matters. the High Court in Northern Ireland? Again, I have to make it absolutely clear that this has nothing to do with leaving the European Union. It is Karen Bradley: The hon. Gentleman would have to about how we make sure that we do so in the right way, take up the reasons why the case was taken with the lady so that I can hold my head up high and look people in in question, but the DeSouza case is a clear example of the eye and say that I am proud to be a parliamentarian how the Northern Ireland Act 1998 did not address in this Parliament, which respects the rule of law. We these matters. I have been clear, in many interventions have to remember that the world will judge us by the since I left my post last summer and while I was in post, wayin which we respect the Belfast/Good Fridayagreement, that respecting the right of everybody who lives in even more than our breaking the withdrawal agreement. Northern Ireland to identify in the way that they are comfortable with is incredibly important and we must respect it. So I say to the Minister: part 5 should not be 7.45 pm in this Bill. The Government should not ask MPs to This is where language matters. I know, more than vote for an illegal law as a negotiating tactic. This part many, how important language is in Northern Ireland. I should be in a separate Bill, if these clauses are needed, have said things, I have misspoken, I have made throwaway and it should be debated separately; it should not be comments, and I have regretted them enormously,because polluting what is otherwise a good and necessary piece they hurt people. People who have been through more of law. All possible steps to avoid needing these clauses hurt than any of us could ever imagine were hurt by should be taken. words that I said, and I regret that more than just about I say to the Minister that I am undecided as to which anything that I have done in my political career. I have way I will vote this evening, because I respect the fact much to be proud of, but I regret having hurt people. that Government have moved and compromised, and I Language is important, so I urge everyone—on the understand that that is a difficult thing for Governments Front Bench, on the Opposition Front Bench, and in all to do. But I ask the Minister to give me clarity: if I walk parts of the Chamber—to remember the language that through the Lobby today, am I breaking the law? If I we use, because our allies are listening to what we say. walk through the Lobby today, will the law be broken as They are not looking at the intricacies of amendment 64 a result of my doing so? Will I have the answer for me at or new clause 3—they do not really know or care—but 3 am, not for my constituents or others, that I have done what they hear is the headline. They hear us saying that the right thing and that this will lead to a better result we are going to break international law, and we are for the UK? prepared to do it. That is really powerful. I am a Conservative with a large “C” and a small “c”. Hilary Benn: It is a great pleasure to follow that fine I am also a Unionist, and I make no apologies for being speech by the right hon. Member for Staffordshire a Unionist. As a Conservative and a Unionist, the Moorlands (Karen Bradley). I want to concentrate on precious thing that matters to me is our Union and the how we get out of this mess without breaching international peace process in Northern Ireland. I tested myself on law and the treaty we signed up to. Four issues have this over the past few days. How will I explain this to my caused all this: the question of exit summary declarations, grandchildren—my children have already told me what the definition of “at-risk goods”, state aid and third they think about this particular issue—when history country listing. The Bill deals with only some of those; judges us? I try to put myself in the shoes of other further legislation is threatened to deal with the rest, but people, and I try to think how it feels today for someone one has to look at them together. 701 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 702

[Hilary Benn] Have the Government proposed using, for example, tariff lines as the way to define goods at risk? Or The first thing I want to say is that it seems the products and shipments, or companies as the basis? To Government are in a state of hopeless confusion on two those who have looked into the issue in great detail, it questions. The first is: is the EU negotiating in good seems that those are probably the three broad approaches faith or not? I asked the Prime Minister that last week that might be taken. I ask the Government to please be at the Liaison Committee and he told me it is not. open with the House of Commons on this matter. Earlier that same day, the Northern Ireland Secretary On state aid, I find it impossible to believe that the told the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee that Government did not realise what the full implications the EU is negotiating in good faith, and indeed the of article 10 might be. Everybody recognised that it Government’s response to that Committee’s report brought into the ambit of the state aid rules what confirmed that. I do not know whether that makes the happens in Northern Ireland, but had it really not Minister, for whom I have a great regard, the adjudicator occurred to Ministers that there might be reach-back—I in this matter, but perhaps he might offer his opinion in think that is the expression—implications for state aid his wind-up, because the Government do not appear to in the United Kingdom? This is currently a theoretical be of one mind. issue, because there are not any cases. The Minister will Secondly,I believe the Minister referred in his speech—I be well aware that in the wake of covid, the EU Commission tried to write down the phrase as I recall it—to, “Harmful has significantly relaxed the state aid rules. Other EU legal defaults that were never intended to be used” or members are giving state aid to all sorts of companies. words to that effect. If they are legal defaults that the The question is how the matter is going to be resolved Government object to, it really does raise the question: by means other than resorting to the breaking of why did the Government sign up to those legal defaults international law. when they negotiated the protocol and the withdrawal There is a great puzzle in respect of the Government’s agreement, and signed that and extolled its virtues to position. When the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster the House of Commons? appeared before the Select Committee on the Future On exit summary declarations, there is a place for this Relationship with the European Union on 11 March and other concerns to be resolved, which is in the Joint and we asked him whether businesses that trade out of Committee, through the article 16 process. The House England into Northern Ireland were going to be subject needs to ask itself why the Government have said so to the full panoply of state aid regulations, he replied: little thus far about their intention to use article 16 if a “No, we do not believe so.” satisfactory agreement cannot be reached; I did not get That was in March, but apparently the Government do an answer from the Prime Minister last week and, with now believe so. What happened between March and respect, I did not get an answer from the Minister today, now to lead them to that conclusion? but it seems that the Government have so little faith in The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster also said: the mechanism they negotiated that they have decided that they need to take powers to breach the terms of the “The subsidy regime that the UK proposes to put in place after treaty, even though—I remind the Minister—article 168 we have left the EU”— of the withdrawal agreement says that, “For any dispute we have now left the EU— between the EU and the UK arising under this agreement, “will be one that the EU will recognise as a robust system.” the EU and the UK shall ‘only’ have recourse to the Here we are in September, and of a robust system for procedures provided for in this agreement. This Bill state aid there is no sight yet. How can that be the case? drives a coach and horses through that sentence, which We read reports in the paper that the reason is because the Government agreed. In the statement that Ministers Ministers cannot agree on what kind of state aid policy put out last week, the Government said that they would they want. use the provisions of article 16 “in parallel with” the The publication of such a policy is urgent for two powers they wish to take in this Bill. In parallel? I really reasons: not only for the purposes of sorting out the do not understand that as an argument, because surely problem of potential reach-back, but for making a they should use the mechanism they have negotiated breakthrough in the trade negotiations. To be fair to the first, and then if they are absolutely determined to EU, it has moved from saying at the beginning, “You break international law, they can get to that subsequently. must follow all our rules on state aid in perpetuity,” to I come back to the point about the Joint Committee. now saying rather plaintively to the Government, “Would Why have the Government not shared with the House you be so kind as to give us just an inkling of what your the proposals they have made to the EU side about how state aid regime is going to look like?” To announce that goods at risk can be identified? It is simply not good we are going to follow the World Trade Organisation enough. Part of the reason why the Government have rules is hardly a revelation, because as an independent got into such a mess is that they have not shared with us member of the WTO we are obliged to follow the WTO how the negotiations are going and have then suddenly rules. As we know, though, they lack important details produced a remedy that is contrary to international law and do not cover services. to solve a problem the contents of which we are not The sooner the Government publish a state aid regime aware of because Government have not shared with to answer the EU’s question, the sooner they can help Members how things are going. the trade negotiations to move forward. Assuming that This is not an academic issue: many businesses that an agreement could be reached on that regime as part of trade into Northern Ireland have absolutely no idea, the negotiations, the Government could, as the Minister with just over three months to go, of what the arrangements will know, use article 13(8) of the withdrawal agreement are going to be—none. There is a responsibility on both to amend article 10, which is the cause of the potential parties—the EU and the UK—to give them some clarity. problem—namely, reach-back. 703 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 704

The Bill does not deal with third-country listing, and Rehman Chishti: It is a real pleasure and a privilege to no Bill could, because it is a regulatory decision of the follow the right hon. Member for Leeds Central (Hilary European Union about the terms on which it lets third- Benn), for whom I have huge admiration and respect. I country food and animal product imports into its sat in this Chamber on 2 December 2015 and listened to jurisdiction. I happen to think that if the EU were to his speech on countering Daesh in Iraq and Syria. He deny us such listing, arguably the UK could take the took a principled position then, as the shadow Foreign EU to the European Court, on the grounds that it was a Secretary, and it was one of the best speeches this perverse decision, or indeed the UK could certainly House has heard. invoke article 16, on the grounds that denying the UK I also agree with the right hon. Gentleman with third-country listing was a breach of the good faith regard to the comments of the Secretary of State for obligation under article 5. Northern Ireland, who said on 8 September that what was being proposed in the Bill 8 pm “does break international law in a very specific and limited I suspect that this is a fuss about nothing, because I way.”—[Official Report, 8 September 2020; Vol. 679, c. 509.] can conceive of no such circumstances. The right hon. That is completely and utterly unacceptable. I am also a Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain lawyer, and I will refer to that comment a little further Duncan Smith) read out the list of all the other countries in my speech. that have been given third-country status. Well, he cannot I accept that the majority of the Bill is necessary for tell me that if those countries have been given it, then an effective United Kingdom single market when we are the EU, which knows what our rules are today—the no longer subject to EU rules. I campaigned for Brexit, Government, to be fair to them, have made it clear what my constituency voted 65% to deliver Brexit, and my the rules are going to be on 1 January, unless and until voting record is the same as that of the Prime Minister they decide to change them—will in the end say, “We and many of those who sit in Cabinet with regard to have no idea how you are going to operate the rules.” I delivering Brexit. Brexit meant many things to many do not think that will be a problem, because it is not a people, but for me it was about sovereignty. The British terribly sensible way for two very large trading entities, public elect their Members of Parliament, who have the with big and important agricultural industries, to behave. final say on the laws that govern our country and our citizens. But Brexit must be delivered in the right way, In relation to the offending clauses in the Bill, I heard respecting the United Kingdom’s commitment to the what the Minister said and what the hon. Member for rule of law, and as a country that stands by the word it Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill) had to say gives. That cannot be compromised on. about the Government’s proposals. In response to what the right hon. Member for Staffordshire Moorlands I have real concerns about clauses 42, 43 and 45 of (Karen Bradley) said a moment ago, whether the illegality this Bill. Brexit was about sovereignty—taking back is the passing of the law all the way through to the control of our laws, borders and money—but under laying of the regulations is not the point. As my hon. those provisions,we would defer that authority to Ministers, Friend the Member for Sheffield Central (Paul Blomfield) who could then, unilaterally,withdrawfrom an international and the former Prime Minister, the right hon. Member agreement passed by this House. How can that be for Maidenhead (Mrs May), made clear in their own sovereignty? It cannot. I agreed with the former Attorney excellent speeches, the damage has been done. It was General, my right hon. and learned Friend the Member done the moment the Secretary of State for Northern for Kenilworth and Southam (Jeremy Wright), when he Ireland got up in the House of Commons and admitted gave his speech to this House on 14 September, about that it was contrary to international law. Normally in a those three specific provisions. He is a great man, and I legal argument, the lawyers in the House—I have great had the privilege to be his Parliamentary Private Secretary respect for them—would be saying, “It breaches the when he was the Attorney General. law,” “No, it doesn’t,” “Yes, it does,” “No, it doesn’t.” For me, there can be no compromise about one’s core Well, that conversation was cut dead when the Secretary beliefs, and my core belief is a respect for the rule of law. of State said that it does. That is really irrelevant, it If you give your word, you have to honour it. What seems to me. I think it is counter-productive. the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland said on 8 September—we sat in our parliamentary offices, and I urge the Government, as have other Members, to we listened to him—is that withdraw the clauses and get back to negotiating “the “this does break international law in a very specific and limited great deal”—I sometimes feel nostalgic for the words way.”—[Official Report, 8 September 2020; Vol. 679, c. 509.] that echo through the mists of time: “One of the easiest trade deals in history”; “A deal with the exact same What are we saying to our citizens—that they can break benefits.” I would like the country to achieve such a other laws in a specific and limited way? Our country is deal, and the Government’s responsibility now is to going through difficult, challenging times and we are stop messing about with this Bill and to negotiate a asking people to adhere to guidance, yet we have a deal, because time is short, before we leave without one Minister of the Crown saying that from the Dispatch because they fail to reach an agreement. Box. There is something called honour, and for me I could Several hon. Members rose— not serve as the Prime Minister’s special envoy for freedom of religion or belief. I conveyed that message to The Temporary Chair (Sir Graham Brady): Order. I the Government last Sunday, and I was told that the remind the Committee that there are still a great many Government would not be accepting the amendment Members on the call list. I therefore urge brevity, in the put forward by my hon. Friend the Member for Bromley interests of all those waiting to speak. and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill). On that basis, on 705 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 706

[Rehman Chishti] I want to finish with a quote, Sir Graham. I know time is of the essence. Parliamentary sovereignty and Monday I took the decision to resign my position. We parliamentary scrutiny are of the utmost importance to talk about being patriotic, and our national anthem each and every one of us. We are all among equals. We says: all have a voice. We take into account the views of our “Long may she reign. May she defend our laws”— constituents, and we come here and we represent them. Over summer, I read a brilliant quote from 2010 by a and “defend our laws” is what this is about. former Member of Parliament, before I came to this I am grateful to have been the Prime Minister’s House. I will read the quote. Some will recognise the special envoy. It was a real privilege and honour to person. He is a man of great integrity and he did the serve as the United Kingdom’s special envoy for freedom right thing. This is what he said about taking Parliament of religion or belief. We took forward 17 different seriously: recommendations of the 22 in the Truro report, but I “a word to the coming generation of politicians. I have one simple also helped, along with the United States and the message: take Parliament seriously. If we, the elected, do not, why ambassador from the Netherlands, to set up the should anybody else? By all means…support the programme on international alliance to promote freedom of religion or which one’s party was elected, but we are not automatons. We are not sent here merely to be cheerleaders, or to get stiff necks belief around the world. We used to say to countries, looking up at the fount of power. We are here to exercise our “Respect article 18 of the universal declaration of human judgment—to hold Ministers to account for the powers they rights”. People can have whatever faith they want or no hold. And that means proper scrutiny. It means insisting that faith, but others must respect that. Ministers engage seriously with Parliament, and that they are open to dialogue.”—[Official Report, 25 March 2010; Vol. 508, Hon. Members would expect the Prime Minister’s c. 486.] special envoy for the United Kingdom to go along to the table and say, “I think we should do this at the On that basis, I am grateful to the Prime Minister Security Council or we should that at the United Nations for listening, engaging and ensuring that we have General Assembly.We should do this at the Organisation amendment 66, should these matters come before the for Security and Co-operation in Europe or we should House and if the United Kingdom ever deviated from do that at Human Rights Council.” But after what the its commitment. Initially, the provisions were put forward Secretary of State for Northern Ireland said at the under statutory instruments, under which the Government Dispatch Box on 8 September, how can one go and could have put forward a 90-minute affirmative motion, lecture others when we are in this situation? with the Minister standing at the Dispatch Box for an hour. Please, as I tried to ask him earlier, will the The question people ask me is: why, then, are you Minister clarify that when and if this comes back to the supporting Government amendment 66? I am supporting House, there will be a full debate, with as many Members amendment 66 for this reason. If we look at the Order of Parliament who need to speak being able to? Paper on Monday14 September and Tuesday15 September, One of the great things I did was to represent our we see that amendment 4 put forward by my hon. country at the canonisation of St John Henry Newman, Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst had a great British saint with global impact. I will end by only 13 signatories. That amendment is for parliamentary quoting his “Lead, Kindly Light”: sovereignty. Parliament should decide: this Parliament … enacted its support of the withdrawal agreement, and if “ I do not ask to see it now wants to come out of it, this Parliament should The distant scene; one step enough for me.” say so, not defer that to Ministers. However, only When and if the Government look to bring these measures 13 Members of Parliament had signed it. I am grateful forward, please do it so that there are appropriate to my right hon. Friend the Member for Ashford (Damian checks and balances at every level by this House. Green) and my hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst, and I am also grateful to the likes of Martin Docherty-Hughes: It is good to follow the my hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge hon. Member for Gillingham and Rainham (Rehman (Dr Spencer), who came in in 2019, who signed the Chishti). I congratulate him on the moral choice of amendment. resigning from the Government, although I remind him that when it comes the law of the country, there is the The amendment asks for parliamentary sovereignty,but law of England and Wales, Scotland and Northern on Monday the Bill passed by 77 votes in this House, so Ireland. how do I know I can get 40 votes to overturn clauses 42, 43 and 45, which I could never accept. No hon. Member As a Scottish nationalist, I have often tried to stick to would accept clauses 42, 43 and 45, so when we are in our maxim of leaving Ireland to the Irish, but in these that position, do we accept amendment 66, rather than constitutionally fraught times I feel it is necessary to the amendment put forward by my hon. Friend the remind the British Conservative and Unionist party of Member for Bromley and Chislehurst, being pragmatic the histories and stories across these islands that give us and being reasonable? I say this as someone who for an understanding of where we find ourselves today. We three years, from 2004 to 2007, worked with the former can be in no doubt that this Government will seek to Prime Minister of who lost her life fighting for portray this perfidious power grab as actually strengthening democracy, going to discussions in the Foreign Office the devolution settlement, which so many of us have with the Foreign Secretaries Jack Straw and David fought so hard to secure, but we know very well from Miliband and looking at the transition to democracy. the history of Northern Ireland that rewriting devolution There always has to be give and take, being pragmatic by decree is simply unsustainable. and being realistic. On that basis, to avoid having to put Let us move beyond the bluff and bluster of this clauses 42, 43 and 45 in the Bill, I support the proposals Government’s Front Bench and the obsequious chatter in Government amendment 66 for parliamentary oversight. of their pliant Back Benchers, and remind ourselves 707 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 708 very clearly that a Union requires Unionists at both of all shades in Belfast, Cardiff and Edinburgh beseech ends.Usually,when I look over to my Scottish Conservative the one across the House from us today at least to listen and Unionist opposites—I do not see any here tonight—I to their concerns, far less treat them as equals in the see fellow Scots who are equally passionate in their family of nations, we owe it to ourselves to ask whether convictions for our nation of Scotland as any on these they understand what “Union” means at all. We in Benches. They are Unionists who are looking desperately Scotland remember that it is not an Act of Union but a to the south to see their convictions mirrored by English treaty of Union, as my hon. and learned Friend the colleagues, but I am afraid that the only colleague they Member for Edinburgh South West (Joanna Cherry) found tonight was the right hon. Member for Maidenhead reminded us earlier. While that framing may not be (Mrs May). possible in other nations, it has certainly spoken to myself and to many of those who do not share my opinions on the constitution, as it demonstrates that 8.15 pm this is at least something of a partnership of equals. As we debate the Northern Ireland protocol here, we see a foreshadow of what is about to happen to my We on these Benches will see our colleagues from the fellow Scots who have placed their faith in this Union, Scottish Conservative and Unionist Benches trooping because while people in Northern Ireland collectively through the Lobby to support this Bill because they voted to remain within the European Union, they have believe it strengthens the Union, but if they were here, I seen not only that express wish disregarded but the very would simply ask them: do you believe the Government fabric of their daily lives become part of the negotiations when they say that the Union is their first priority? As over the past three years. Now they see the future of we debate the Northern Ireland protocol today and that quotidian offered up as a gambling chip by this think of the past three years through the eyes of Unionists Government. One party, the Democratic Unionist party, here—the fine words of flattery, followed by flummery sought to follow its Unionist convictions by backing and forgetting, the lack of understanding and the taking this Government, but its Members have instead seen for granted—I ask my Unionist pals: can you trust themselves, cajoled, seduced, rebuffed and tossed aside these people? I mentioned the temporary provisions Act before being asked again to come back into the warm of 1972. I could just as easily have gone back to the embrace of the Conservative party. Government of Ireland Act 1920 to demonstrate how, Let us look into the forgotten past, to the Northern when the Unionists on these islands set aside their own Ireland (Temporary Provisions) Act 1972, in which this convictions and interests in pursuit of a mythical greater House decided unilaterally to pluck the powers of the good, it rarely works out for them. As my pals seek to people of Northern Ireland invested in their Parliament vote through this power grab to allow a Government far in Stormont and bring them here, where they could be away from the people they represent to rewrite their “better administered”, quite against wishes of the Unionist unwritten constitution and to award themselves sweeping leadership of the day. I am surprised not to have heard powers over the people of Scotland, please don’t kid more about that Act, given that it would be almost yourselves: this Government have been willing to pick entirely analogous to the situation in which we find up and put down Unionist leaders for as long as the ourselves today, were it not for the fact that direct rule Union has existed. They did it to Edward Carson, they was again discontinued only last year, thanks in part to did it to Brian Faulkner, they have just done it to Arlene the efforts of the right hon. Member for Skipton and Foster and, let us be absolutely clear, they are about to Ripon (Julian Smith). Of course, like anyone in the do it to Douglas Ross—gutted, washed out and tossed Conservative party with any talent or opinions of their aside like a haddie on the pier at Buckie. own, he was sacked by the Government—I intimated to him and others that I intended to mention them in my Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con): speech this evening. Well, Sir Graham, it is difficult to follow that. I remember In the face of the deteriorating security situation in your enjoinder, Sir, that we should stick to five minutes. 1972, and to avoid the possibility of an unwelcome So far, nobody has met that challenge. I thought that result in a Stormont election, Westminster unilaterally the hon. Member for West Dunbartonshire (Martin disbanded the Parliament that had sat since 1920, deciding Docherty-Hughes) was going to do so several minutes instead to govern Northern Ireland through Orders in ago, but he did not. Council laid before this House of Commons. Not only was this done against the express wishes of their supposed I rise to support this Bill. I especially support clause 11 Unionist allies—Government Members should maybe and part 5, and amendment 66, the “break glass” put their phones down and learn a little bit of history amendment. It reflects in all important respects tonight—but the supposed temporary nature of the amendment 4, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member arrangements lasted for more than 30 years, until the for Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill), the Belfast agreement. That was power previously held by Chair of the Justice Committee. We have all been grateful the peoples in these islands being taken back by a to him for the consideration that he and others have Conservative Government. So how have they managed given to this matter. I appreciate the agony that many to do it all over again? hon. and right hon. Members have gone through in At the start of my speech, I brought forward the idea trying to work their way through this Bill and reconcile that a Union must have Unionists at both ends, yet it with their views on international law. throughout the whole Brexit process this Government have not stopped to think once about their own actions The hon. Member for Sheffield Central (Paul Blomfield) and how they affect this Union, least it be for the spoke about values and asserted that our reputation purposes of a cheap soundbite. So, as the Governments was at stake. Last week, we saw how the UK stands up 709 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 710

[Dr Andrew Murrison] into question the “acting in good faith” enjoinder, which I have referred to, and which is clearly contained for international law. We saw a graphic demonstration within the withdrawal agreement and its accompanying of our values when perhaps others fall short. In the political declaration. middle of the channel—not a pleasant place generally speaking, and it certainly was not last week—there was Mr (Wycombe) (Con): I very much agree an inflatable dinghy containing 16 Afghan refugees and with my right hon. Friend, but does he agree with me asylum seekers. They were people in peril on the sea, that it is also contrary to the European Union’s conceding and they were being shepherded by the French navy not to the UK that Northern Ireland is in the UK’s customs to safety, but to British territorial waters where, of territory? That raises additional considerations that are course, eventually they were picked up by Border Force very material to these clauses.I want to take this opportunity and conducted to a place of safety. I am proud of that, to say that of course I shall therefore support the not only because it demonstrates our British values— Government. something that many may be uncomfortable with—but because, in doing that, we were complying with one of Dr Murrison: I am very pleased to hear that expression the most fundamental of international treaties, the United of confidence in this good Bill, which is being made Nations convention on the law of the sea of 1982. There better by the amendment tabled by the Government. I is no grey in this treaty, no ambiguity, and it strikes at agree with my hon. Friend’s point. the very heart of what we are in this country. Indeed, it strikes at the very heart of our humanity, because we I have already gone over my five minutes, Dame save life and we ask questions later. Eleanor, but it is important to note the extreme hardball attitude that the EU has recently adopted and what that Others have described violations of international law says about what might be in store for us in the future. by the European Union and others, and I am certainly The points that the hon. Member for Belfast East not going to rattle them off again. We heard eloquent (Gavin Robinson) made about state aid are extremely contributions from my hon. Friend the Member for germane to this. I remember well, as Northern Ireland Stone (Sir William Cash) and my right hon. Friend the Minister and Chairman of the Northern Ireland Affairs Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Committee, the issues relating to Bombardier. It was Duncan Smith) in which they listed some of the treaties plain as a pikestaff that this might be used in the event that have been mutable. Clearly, UNCLOS was mutable that the UK decided to support Bombardier in GB, on the part of our largest continental neighbour last because, as things stand, the EU would claim that it is week, but it was not for us and, for me, that is the unfair and unlawful because of Bombardier’s presence message that goes to the international community, not in Belfast. That is a clear and present danger. some fine debate about this particular measure that we are discussing this evening. That message will have gone It is also important to get real about what we are up out loud and clear and, on that, I am extremely proud against. I have every respect for the right hon. Member indeed. What is clear from the list that others have for Leeds Central (Hilary Benn), who quite rightly trotted out is that international law is a contested space, expounded at length on the fact that the negotiation has and sometimes it is mutable and can be overwritten. to be bounded in good will and said that this will cause difficulty for us in Brussels, but I am clear that this I disagree with my right hon. Friend the Member for negotiation is no love-in. It is a bare-knuckle affair. Maidenhead (Mrs May) on this: she said that two Pique is never far away, nor is the desire to make an wrongs do not make a right, and generally speaking she example of an errant UK pour encourager les autres. is absolutely correct, but by listing the occasions on As my hon. Friend the Member for Stone said, international which international law has been breached, written law is 40% law and 60% politics, as it is here—this is over, mutable or contested, we are setting the context politics in the raw. for what we are doing on this occasion. That is something I am sorry that, throughout this whole torrid process, that I think has been lost in this debate. Time and time hon. and right hon. Members have shackled the UK again, international law has been shown to be not Government in our negotiations in Brussels. The British absolute but, on occasion, capable of being overwritten, public know that. The hon. Member for Sheffield Central modified and made mutable by this country, other shakes his head, but he should know that more than countries and the European Union. anybody else, because the British public spoke loud and clear on this issue in December. They understand what Generally, we stand by what we sign up to and are as we often forget in this place, and they get this business good as our word, so what has changed since last year? in the way that many of us do not. His party needs to I, like many right hon. and hon. Members, have given learn that lesson. That is why it suffered so badly in this some considerable thought. What has changed is December. the appreciation of the issue of good faith, which ran like a vein through a block of granite throughout all the discussions last year. This works only if the parties act 8.30 pm in good faith, and it has become clear over the past Without amendment 66 or perhaps amendment 4, we several weeks that the European Union side is prepared would have a problem internally too, because we are up to regard the Northern Ireland protocol as a lever to get against the judiciary, which has shown itself to be what it wants. It raises the spectre of agrifood being perfectly capable of going head to head with the British unable to move freely between the nations of the United Government. By bringing this matter back to the House, Kingdom, which is clearly contrary to the Act of Union it will not be the British Government that the Supreme and drives a coach and horses through the Good Friday Court goes head to head with. It will be Parliament agreement. It was not on the table last year, and it calls itself, and more than that—the people of this country. 711 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 712

Amendment 66 will give certainty on both sides of the Once the power to break the law is on the statute English channel. It makes a good Bill better. It assures book, it is there—no nuances, no ifs or buts, and no and insures our national interests, and I wish it well. kicking the can down the road. Every MP who votes for these clauses will be voting against the rule of law. We Dame Margaret Hodge (Barking) (Lab): I will to try are being sucked in as accomplices to the Government’s to keep within the five minutes, to give time to others. I reckless bid to undermine the rule of law, and that goes never intervene in debates on the European Union, and for our Law Officers. They should hold their heads in I do not intervene in debates on Northern Ireland, but I shame at not resigning and speaking out against this felt I had to intervene today on a debate that concerns irresponsible move. Yet this move is part of a consistent the rule of law, because I consider it fundamental to the pattern of behaviour: disdain for the judiciary, contempt health of our democracy. for us here in Parliament, animosity towards civil servants I have been an MP for many years. I have sat here and loathing of the BBC. feeling pride, joy, uncertainty and anger as we have This Government approach their work as if it were a considered and debated new laws, but never have I felt game in which they attack the pillars of our democracy the shame that I feel today, when we are being asked by simply to gain a mendacious, populist headline. Their our Government to support a proposition that entails latest target is the rule of law, but it is Britain’s long-term Britain deliberately and intentionally breaking international future that is at stake tonight. There is nothing decent, law. The plea of mitigation from some Members today honourable or patriotic about playing roulette with the and from the Prime Minister that this is merely a safety rule of law. Breaking it will destroy our reputation, net and an insurance policy; the false assertion from the integrity, authority and influence on the world stage. I Law Officers that the ministerial code, under which urge every hon. Member of Parliament to vote against Ministers swear on oath to comply with the law, applies this outrageous proposal. only to domestic legislation; and the fabricated claim by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster that this David Warburton (Somerton and Frome) (Con): It is proposed law a great pleasure to contribute to a debate with such “protects, enhances and strengthens our Union and the prosperity significant implications. I will be brief; I reckon I can be of all our people”—[Official Report, 14 September 2020; Vol. 680, the first person to break precedent and stick within five c. 127.] minutes,because I know an enormous number of colleagues —all those statements are simply plain wrong, and want to speak. those who made them know that. The Bill really is crucial in maintaining the integrity We are being asked tonight to support Great Britain and the smooth operation of the UK’s internal market, breaking the law. The Vienna convention clearly states: and ensuring that they are underpinned by the principle “A party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as of non-discrimination across the four constituent parts justification for its failure to perform a treaty.” of our Union. I will focus on clause 45 and its constitutional I put it to the Committee that it is the patriotic duty of ramifications,because the question that has been engrossing each and every one of us to vote down this proposal. the Committee, and the public, is that of the notwith- Great Britain’s global influence, our ability to hold our standing powers and their potential breach of international head up high and even our naked self-interest will all be law. wrecked by this disastrous proposal to deliberately flout Even a potential breach of international law is to be international law. Our post-Brexit ambition to establish treated with the utmost seriousness, but to suggest, as our country as global Britain, so that we can be an some have, that the provisions of the Bill place us in influential player in world affairs, would be fatally some sort of moral equivalence with China or Russia undermined. How could we challenge a corrupt really is risible. Degree and proportion matter. Clause 45, Government or stand up to an aggressive dictatorship? as I hope it will be amended by amendment 66, equips Who would listen when we support the citizens of Hong democratically elected Members of this House to decide Kong, challenge the Russians over the Skripal poisoning whether or not to protect the powers outlined in clauses 42 or defend the Rohingya people in if we and 43 in the case of need. Should this House decide to, ourselves flout international lawto suit the Prime Minister’s it would mitigate the risk of the UK’s internal market short-term whim? splintering, with all the potential consequences that Today’s FinCEN leaks show that the UK is at the would flow from that. heart of global money laundering and financial crime. There is no equivalence there, and I do not believe How can Britain lead global efforts to combat that if we that the Bill is symptomatic of some kind of collapse of are not seen as an honest broker or a country that will British support for a rules-based international order. uphold international agreements? The farce of doing We have heard a lot of this before, but I must say that I this when it threatens our relationship with the USA, as do not remember the same level of outrage bursting we see if we read Joe Biden’s tweet or listen to Nancy forth when Germany or France violated treaty obligations Pelosi’s comments, beggars belief. To deliberately put on deficit and debt levels, when Canada broke international this key friendship at risk and deliberately jeopardise a law to legalise cannabis, or in the Kadi and Barakaat trade deal with the USA is utterly irresponsible and case,which my right hon. Friend the Member for Chingford unpatriotic. I say to those on the Government Benches and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith) mentioned, who were brave enough to voice their opposition last when the European Court of Justice ruled that the EU week, “Don’t be bought off by a shabby and dishonest should ignore the UN charter—the highest source of compromise. Don’t stand on the head of a pin and be international law—if it conflicted with the EU’s internal beguiled into thinking that a vote for the amendment constitutional order. The ECJ then said: means that we’re not actually legislating to break our “A treaty can never enjoy primacy over provisions…that form international legal obligations.” part of the constitutional foundations of the union.” 713 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 714

[David Warburton] remove us from the customs union. The right hon. Member for Maidenhead understood that, and when That cuts to the heart of the issue. When treaty obligations she sought to negotiate the withdrawal agreement, she threatened to damage the constitutional coherence of the came forward with the backstop. It was that backstop EU, it felt not only free but obligated to disregard them. that the now Prime Minister resigned over, eventually, That is not to say, of course, that anyone should and then proceeded to stick pins into the right hon. contemplate the EU using such powers lightly, but if, Lady until she too could stand it no longer. He eventually and only if, a situation arose where the movement of took her place, at which point he renegotiated the goods between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK withdrawal agreement with the protocol attached to it. was hampered and access to our internal markets was The essence of that renegotiation, of which he has fettered, not only would it be essential but surely we, boasted so many times since, was rooted in that backstop. too, would be obliged to have powers in place to meet Tonight was always going to come, because the such a contingency. Like the EU, the UK has a Union Government and the Prime Minister have insisted all to protect, and it is absolutely right that it equips itself along that they could do three things when at best they to do so through the clauses we are currently considering. could only ever do two. They told us that they could That is why I cannot support Opposition amendments leave the customs union, that they could avoid the that seek to de-fang clause 45. placing of a hard border on the mainland of Ireland, I pay tribute to the hard work of my hon. Friend the and that they could avoid a border down the Irish sea. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill) Once we come out of the customs union, we can only and my right hon. Friend the Member for Ashford do one or other; we cannot do them both. And what we (), and I am reassured by Government have seen tonight is these chickens coming home to amendment 66 that the exercise of these powers will roost. Goodness only knows they were warned often require parliamentary approval. As I said, even a limited enough. breach of international law is a serious matter and it is right that colleagues from across the House will have 8.45 pm the opportunity to exercise their judgment in that respect. I have always seen this protocol as a threat to the Of course, no one wants to see Ministers forced to come Belfast agreement. The withdrawal agreement with to this House seeking approval to use these powers, not the protocol attached to it is a political choice made by least because that would suggest that the attempts of the Prime Minister to give Brexit and leaving the customs the EU and the UK to agree a trade deal had stalled or union precedence over the Belfast agreement. This is failed altogether. not some matter of detail; this is a question that goes Finally, it is worth restating that of course a trade right to the very heart of the deal that was negotiated by deal is in the best interests of the EU and the UK, but if the Prime Minister himself, and we cannot in all seriousness all efforts to secure such a deal fail and the EU then acts enter into an agreement and then seek to repudiate it on its threat to damage the UK, it is essential that we because the other party is doing what we have just have the necessary tools to protect our national coherence agreed they are allowed to do. and the economic framework on which that depends. I turn now to the Government amendment that follows Mr Alistair Carmichael: I am sure, Dame Rosie, that on from the representations made by the hon. Member over the years, you and I have both sat through many for Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill). As a debates where it was obvious eventually that everything general rule, I am pragmatic—I believe that half a loaf had been said but that not yet everybody had said it. I is better than no loaf of bread—but on a matter of this fear that we may be into that territory today, but importance I have to say to the House that the deal that uniquely, I think we got to that point after the first the hon. Gentleman has secured is simply not good contribution from a Back Bencher. The contribution enough, and it is the raw politics that render it inadequate. from the right hon. Member for Maidenhead (Mrs May) Just imagine the conversation in Downing Street between was quite one of the most remarkable and clinical the Prime Minister and the Chief Whip when it comes deconstructions of the Government’s argument that it to that vote. The Prime Minister will ask the Chief was possible to imagine. She spoke with total conviction Whip, “Can you win it?” Of course, he must be canny in and clarity, which together were absolutely irresistible. his answer—we both know that—but it has to start, In fact, I think it is worth recording for the benefit of surely, “Well, Prime Minister, with a majority of 80”. Hansard that no one on the Treasury Bench did resist That is the political reality. We know, as the right hon. her. The Minister and the Secretary of State could have Member for New Forest East (Dr Lewis) learned to his intervened and sought to put her right if they thought cost, that this Government play whipping hard ball they were able to do so, but of course they did not. They when it matters to them, and that is what they will do in sat there and squirmed, and it was a joy for many the event that this is the only protection that stands Opposition Members to watch. It took me back to between them and getting what they want. another similar moment in March 2003, when the late Also, as the right hon. Member for Maidenhead said, Robin Cook delivered his resignation statement from it really makes no difference whether it is Ministers in the Government Back Benches. Again, there was the Downing Street or Members in this House who break same conviction and clarity delivered at a moment of the law; at the end of the day Britain as a whole—the existential significance and in relation to a matter that United Kingdom—will be judged on that action and will inevitably bring this country into conflict with the nobody will care who was ultimately responsible for it. rule of law. I remind the House that in 2003 this House had a It is worth recalling why we have a protocol to the vote on the question of whether we should go to war withdrawal agreement in the first place. It is essentially in Iraq, and this House voted to go to war in Iraq, as a result of the Prime Minister’s determination to an action which again had little or no foundation in 715 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 716 international law, and which was ultimately shown to be interpretation of the protocol would lead to the creation an unlawful act. Nobody cared that it was an act that of a barrier within the United Kingdom, thus seriously had been authorised by this House and not just by compromising our political and economic integrity.Such Ministers in Downing Street. action by the European Union threatens the territorial This is not an isolated action from this Government; integrity of the UK. It threatens to take Northern it is part of a course of conduct. As Oscar Wilde might Ireland out of the UK customs territory, and it threatens have said had he ever found himself in this unfortunate our internal market. position, “For a Government to act unlawfully once That is unacceptable, and no Government can sit might be regarded as misfortune; to act unlawfully back and allow an international organisation to do that twice looks like carelessness.” to the very fabric of our country. The Bill is therefore a In fact, come Wednesday, the Government are going safeguard that ensures that the UK is not divided and to introduce bring a Bill that will effectively decriminalise there is no external interference in the running of our the use of torture as part of armed conflict in certain country today or in the decades to come. The Bill circumstances. That is, again, almost certainly a breach ensures that we leave the EU as a sovereign independent of international law, so it is not a question of misfortune country, as the people of the UK voted to do. or mistake or carelessness; it begins to look like a habit, It is to be hoped that an agreement can be reached and it is a habit that any wise Government would be with the EU. Indeed, Donald Tusk originally offered a well advised to avoid. On this occasion, it is bad not just Canada-style agreement, but to the extent that there is for our reputation as a player on the world stage, but it a material breach of good faith by the EU, we have the threatens the constitutional integrity of the United safety of the Bill, which not only provides for the Kingdom as a unitary state, and the Conservatives and preservation of our Union but ensures that measures Unionists on the other side of the House should understand are not followed through without first having obtained exactly what they enter into if they support it in the the consent of the House. Lobby tonight. Finally, let us remember that all Members on these Government Benches stood as candidates at the last Mr (North West Cambridgeshire) (Con): general election not only as Conservatives, but as It is a pleasure to follow the right hon. Member for Conservative and Unionist candidates.Every single Member Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael). I shall speak to on these Government Benches sits here as a Conservative clauses 40 to 45. Let us be clear from the start: the Bill and Unionist Member of Parliament. To now not agree protects and strengthens the United Kingdom, and it the passing of this Bill would make a complete mockery safeguards peace in Northern Ireland. There is nothing of the very platform upon which we stood to get elected in it that undermines the Belfast/Good Friday agreement, to Parliament. nor is there any possibility of a hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland under any circumstances. The First Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means (Dame From the very outset, the United Kingdom has acted in Rosie Winterton): I thank the last few speakers, who good faith, and it did so when it signed the withdrawal have stuck brilliantly to the shorter time limit, but I agreement and the Northern Ireland protocol. Crucially, point out that there are still many colleagues who want from the outset, the UK’s understanding of the provisions to get in. If we can stick to the five minutes, that would in the agreement and the protocol were abundantly be very considerate of others who have sat here for a clear to the EU and all those at the negotiating table. It long time wanting to speak. is clear to the extent that some matters need clarification that we put faith—honest faith—in the Joint Committee Sammy Wilson: I assume that your remarks were reaching reasonable interpretations, being fully aware addressed to me, Chair, and I will do my best to respond of our understanding of the issues that needed to be positively. It is a great joy to follow the hon. Member for ironed out. North West Cambridgeshire (Mr Vara), who has been a It was not just our understanding of the agreement great friend of Northern Ireland and has taken a principled and protocol on which we relied. The Northern Ireland stand during the previous debates on the Brexit negotiations. protocol is clear about some key aspects. Article 1, as He is highly regarded in Northern Ireland for his principled well as affirming that nothing in the protocol should stand, his pro-Unionist views and his willingness to interfere with the provisions of the Belfast/Good Friday make sacrifices for those pro-Unionist views, too. agreement, says: We will be supporting the Bill this evening and these “This Protocol respects the essential state functions and territorial particular clauses, but I have to say we have some integrity of the United Kingdom.” reservations about the extent and the distance that the Article 4 provides: Government have gone to try to reverse the damage “Northern Ireland is part of the customs territory of the done by the withdrawal agreement and, in particular, United Kingdom.” the Northern Ireland protocol. I am pleased that the Article 6 goes on to say: Government now recognise that, either inadvertently or “Nothing in this Protocol shall prevent the United Kingdom deliberately, damage is being done to not just Northern from ensuring unfettered market access for goods moving from Ireland, but the United Kingdom as a whole as a result Northern Ireland to other parts of the United Kingdom’s internal of the withdrawal agreement, and they are trying to market.” reverse it. We now find, however, that the EU is suggesting Two arguments have been advanced as to why people interpretations of the protocol that were never envisaged, should oppose the Bill. The first—it has been an obsession notwithstanding the fact that the provisions are clearly in the House this evening, and outside the House over set out in the protocol itself, as I have read out. There the past number of days—is that it goes against the have been clear suggestions from the EU that its Good Friday agreement. Indeed, if one looks at the 717 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 718

[Sammy Wilson] so why not go through those?” The fact of the matter is that we have three months left. There is no certainty in amendments tabled by the nationalist Social Democratic Northern Ireland among businesses. Are they going to and Labour party and the nationalist Alliance party, it have to pay taxes on every good that they bring in on is clear that their only concern is the Good Friday which there is an EU tariff, whether it is consumed in agreement, or their interpretation of the Good Friday Northern Ireland or not? Which range of goods will be agreement. All the amendments that my party have covered by that? We do not know. Is it them all? Is it a tabled address not the alleged ineffectiveness of the very limited list? When we send goods to the other parts protocol in dealing with the Good Friday agreement, of the United Kingdom, will we have to fill in export but the real problems that will be caused for Unionists, declarations, with the extra costs and administration? nationalists, the young, the old, businesses and workers Consumers in Northern Ireland do not know whether, in Northern Ireland by the protocol going through in when they buy goods from and eBay, they will the form that the EU wishes and by it being imposed be delivered to Northern Ireland, or whether the burden in the way the EU wishes. of bringing goods into Northern Ireland will be such The protocol will have an effect by putting up costs—that that both those companies will simply say, “It’s not is not my assessment, but the Government’s—reducing worth our while.” opportunities and variety for consumers, impacting on The whole concept of the internal market has been investment and impacting on the trade we do with our split by the withdrawal agreement. Some people claim biggest market in GB. That is the effect. I will not go that the Government are trying to tear up the withdrawal through all our amendments, because my hon. Friend agreement, but this is the irony: in my constituency only the Member for Belfast East (Gavin Robinson) went last week, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food through them very succinctly and effectively when he and Rural Affairs was instructing—I do not know how was speaking. All our amendments are designed to he does this under the devolved rules—civil servants in undo that economic damage. Northern Ireland to get on with putting up a border Let me just address the issue of the Good Friday post within the United Kingdom, between different agreement. It is significant that when pressed about parts of the United Kingdom. We are told, “Oh, don’t how the Good Friday agreement is damaged, all we can worry, it’ll be minimal.” Well, £15.5 million-worth of get from those who make that claim is, “Well, it may not building is hardly about minimal checks. Forty-five actually go against what is written in the Good Friday thousand square feet of building, in which lorries will agreement, but it goes against the spirit of it”, or to use be emptied and searched, is hardly about minimal checks. the words of the hon. Member for Belfast South (Claire Ministers tell us, “Well, it’s only a precaution.” They Hanna), “It goes against the implications”—not the must have money to throw away if they are building wording, and she admitted that—“of the Good Friday these buildings only as a precaution and they might agreement”. She could not find a clause in the Good never be used. Friday agreement that was breached by the legislation. We need certainty. Let us not forget that these issues Instead, it was the intention and the implication of it. have not even been dealt with at the Joint Committee. The truth of the matter is, of course, that the Good All we have had are threats: “We’re going to not list the Friday agreement is offended by the withdrawal agreement, UK. You’ll not be able to bring food in from the UK.” because the withdrawal agreement affects Northern Ireland In the absence of negotiations being conducted in good politically. Laws will now be made in Brussels rather faith, the Government’s first duty is not to adhere to the than in Westminster. Northern Ireland will be subject to letter of an agreement that the other side is clearly not rule by the EU; we will be part of its single market rules honouring and is not even trying to work towards rather than part of the UK single market. finding some agreement on. The duty of the Government is to the people in our own country—to the people who belong to the United Kingdom and who, under the Act 9 pm of Union, have been guaranteed no impediments to The Union, of course, is not just about where our trade and that their prosperity will not be affected by laws are made. The Union is about the economic benefits impositions of taxes and barriers to trade. That is the of being joined with the four nations. Indeed, article 6 Government’s first obligation. For those reasons, I believe of the Act of Union concentrates on the economic that the Government are right. I do not think that the benefits. The benefit of being part of the United Kingdom tinkering with the withdrawal agreement in this Bill or is that none of the countries within it face tariffs on even the promises that have been made today that other trade with each other or barriers to trade with each parts will be dealt with in the Finance Bill are sufficient. other, and each has the opportunity to share in any I would say to Conservative Members, with many of economic treaties that the United Kingdom enters into whom I fought the Brexit fight, that there are many with third countries, yet all those things are breached as other mines and hand grenades in the withdrawal a result of the protocol. The Government, in this Bill, agreement. The EU will still, through the European seek to acknowledge that those issues come from the Court of Justice, be able to tell us how much we owe in withdrawal agreement and to remedy them. divorce payments and future payments. It will still be The right hon. Member for Leeds Central (Hilary able to have jurisdiction and make adjudications if Benn) and others, including the former Prime Minister, there is a dispute about the rights of EU citizens living the right hon. Member for Maidenhead (Mrs May), say, in this country. There will still be disputes on its books, “Oh, but there are ways of dealing with this. You deal and for years into the future it will be able to adjudicate with them through the withdrawal agreement and the on where that impinges on European Union law. Many mechanisms in withdrawal agreement. There’s a Joint other things in the withdrawal agreement are not being Committee and there’s an arbitration panel and so on, addressed in this Bill. That is why the only way of 719 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 720 getting out of the quagmire and getting Brexit really those in Manchester, Liverpool, Lancashire and beyond. done and delivered is for the Government not just to We travel, live and work on both sides of the short tinker with the withdrawal agreement: it has to be straits of the Irish sea, as my hon. Friend the Member replaced. for Burnley (Antony Higginbotham) said. It will shock several hon. Members that I am actually Mr Laurence Robertson (Tewkesbury) (Con): It is a really old—old enough to remember the shock of seeing pleasure, as always, to follow the right hon. Member for my home town of Manchester shattered by an explosion East Antrim (Sammy Wilson). He may well have gone and the devastation of the Warrington bomb. From the over his five minutes, but every word was well worth ’90s onwards, I have been proud to have good friends on listening to. I will make sure that I stick to five minutes. different sides of the Northern Irish community who I had the pleasure and honour of chairing the Northern studied, lived and worked here and in the north-west, Ireland Affairs Committee for seven years, and our first and who are now successful business women trading on report was to encourage the Government to explore both sides of the Irish sea. That is not to forget my ways in which corporation tax in Northern Ireland next-door neighbour. could be reduced to the levels in the Republic so that Those wonderful women and men told me stories of Northern Ireland businesses could compete on a level their childhoods. They were often a difficult and heart- playing field. We were told by the European Union that rending listen, but they are important for today’s debate. it would be against its rules to do that: it had to be They were of losing a parent to a car bomb, of having devolved and the Northern Ireland Assembly had to do two different ways to say house to avoid the beating that it, and even then it would be very restricted when it tried would undoubtedly come if they identified their community to do it. Such taxation, which normally we would claim by their pronunciation, and of the fear that they would as our responsibility in this place, comes under the state not be able to go home if peace was not secured. To the aid rules. When we talk about bringing powers over many hon. Members who have proposed that the Bill state aid back to this Parliament, we are not necessarily poses a threat to the hard-won peace and that the talking about bailing out lame ducks. I am showing my Government would consciously do something to bring age when I mention that phrase; I think it was first used about such awful events and bring them back, I say an in the early 1970s. We are not even just talking about emphatic no. giving boosts to certain parts of the economy. We are As a young woman, I listened to teenage girls crying actually, in some cases, talking about the control of in a pub about what had happened to them and their taxation. We are all familiar with the phrase, “No families. I promised myself that if I were ever in a taxation without representation.” It is very important, position to have influence, “never again” would be my therefore, that the Government stand firm on this issue. mantra. To keep that promise to my teenage self, I have When I was working to prepare the Committee’s examined in detail the measures in the Bill and studied report, I said that it was very important to cement the the text of the Good Friday agreement, specifically the relative peace that had been achieved in Northern Ireland section on economic, social and cultural issues, which by having a sound economy. Obviously one of the best includes: ways to achieve a sound economy is through trade. It is “the British Government will pursue broad policies for sustained therefore very important that we do everything we can economic growth and stability in Northern Ireland and for promoting to protect trade in the United Kingdom, and, as far as I social inclusion, including in particular community development can make out, that is exactly what this Bill is trying to and the advancement of women in public life.” do. It not only connects the four countries of the The Bill in no way undermines the Good Friday United Kingdom and paves the way for them to continue agreement. On the contrary, it includes provisions to to trade with each other very easily; it also makes sure protect the agreement and help to ensure that, regardless that Northern Ireland can trade, as the right hon. of whether further agreement is reached in negotiations Member for East Antrim said, with its largest trading with the EU, there will be no hard border between partner, and that is Great Britain. As I said on Second Northern Ireland and Great Britain, and Northern Reading, north-south trade is very important, but it is Ireland businesses will continue to benefit from unrestricted not as valuable as east-west trade or west-east trade. access to the rest of the UK market when the transition That is something we have to be determined to protect. period ends. I do not anticipate the European Union working We need the ability to pursue, as it says in the Good from a position of bad faith. I am sure that it will Friday agreement, broad policies for sustained economic continue to do everything it can to protect its businesses growth. My reading of the WA requires us to issue by coming to a free trade agreement with the United specific clarifications encoded in the Bill. The Government Kingdom. If we achieve that, none of what we are are taking reasonable steps to create a safety net that discussing tonight becomes important. In case it does ensures that they are always able to deliver on their not act in good faith, however, we need an insurance commitments to the people of Northern Ireland and policy so that we can cement the relative peace in uphold the gains of the peace process. To be specific, we Northern Ireland through prosperity and continue to cannot have a situation where goods between Great secure the Union of the United Kingdom. Britain and Northern Ireland face restrictions from a third party and where we cannot help to pursue community Katherine Fletcher (South Ribble) (Con): I intend to development due to EU regulations. keep my remarks short to aid the House’s consideration I am confident that the Government’s commitment of such an important topic. I am a proud child of the to the Good Friday agreement is beyond question, but I north-west of England and I am sure the House agrees appeal to EU and UK leadership to redouble their that there are strong links between the communities of efforts in negotiations to reach an agreement and render Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland and the safety net not required. 721 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 722

[Katherine Fletcher] good will is a resource that the Government have now thoroughly exhausted. The Government stand ready to I thank the Government for amendment 66 and for sacrifice any country in the UK, to jettison any basic giving the House an ability to have its say should that measure of international responsibility and to compromise eventuality even come close to coming to pass. the UK’s international reputation, such as it is, to their I will vote with the Government on the Bill today and ideological thirst for the purest of all Brexits. I will keep my word to those old friends of mine who As regards the EU establishing checks on the border, owned the white Vectra, enjoyed a good DJ set and to that too would appear to be in contravention of the whom my drink will always remain a Guinness. They protocol, which states that the UK and the EU made a are all powerful businesswomen—I will support them guarantee of avoiding a hard border, including any and I will support the Bill. physical infrastructure or related checks and controls. But make no mistake, when a customs infrastructure 9.15 pm goes up,it will be the United Kingdom and this Government who will be found to be delinquent and not the EU. The Dave Doogan (Angus) (SNP): The Bill is objectionable EU is not legislating to renege on the withdrawal agreement, in a very broad sense, and my colleagues and I will not but the UK is. A border between Northern Ireland and rest in detailing its egregious impositions on Scotland the Republic—how can it have come to this, many ask. I and our people. Like others, I look across the Chamber do not know how familiar the Minister is with border and I cannot see a single Scottish Tory MP in here. installations in Northern Ireland, but I recall very well Perhaps they are not worried about how goods will move what a menacing scar they were on the Irish countryside. freely between Scotland and Northern Ireland, but I I say that with all due deference to my Northern Irish can assure the House that I and my colleagues are. colleagues, whose lived experience I cannot even hope As we debate part 5 of the Bill, like many other to comprehend. The irony is not lost on those of us with hon. and right hon. Members I focus on clauses 42, 43 a closeness to that corner of these islands that the and 45, which would see comprehensive powers afforded erasing of that border and the securing of peace in the to Ministers to disapply wide-ranging elements of the 1990s was a product of real statesmen and women who protocol and the withdrawal agreement, therefore breaching possessed and deployed political courage, wisdom and established international obligations and international foresight. Contrast that with the reckless disregard of law. All this would essentially be applicable unilaterally this Prime Minister and—let us call them—his associates, and without the burden of impasse having been established who would not be fit to carry the bags of people such as beforehand between the EU and the UK, which also Mo Mowlam, John Hume, David Trimble, Senator dismisses the obligations to unblock any such disputes George Mitchell and many more. What will the clauses through arbitration as set out in article 68 of the in part 5 of the Bill, so enacted, mean for people in withdrawal agreement—another distinct breach of faith. Northern Ireland—in not just the Six Counties but the neighbouring counties in the Republic, with cross-border This calamity is not some unconventional wheeze, economies? What hardship and anxiety awaits the people such as fantasy extra funding for the NHS as a Brexit and businesses in counties such as Cavan, Monaghan dividend, or describing this deal to the exhausted UK and Donegal? public as oven-ready just before an election. This is breaking international law: it is in a different league The pride of all British nationalists is the alleged altogether.If the hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst strength of the Union but, as we see in the Bill, Northern (Sir Robert Neill) were still in his place, I would say to Ireland is, like Scotland and Wales, important to the him that amendment 66 is a slight improvement on British state only when it can further a British ambition where we were a number of days ago, but he has warned or generate a British receipt. The toll that takes on our the Government that it is not a green light—it is certainly peoples is merely collateral, and it was ever thus. It is not a red light and it is barely an amber light, because hard to know which is the less competent: signing a with a majority of 80 the Government will have no treaty that stymies their own Brexit ambitions or trying difficulty whatever in getting it approved by willing to defend and protect their precious Union by tearing Tory Members. up the basis of devolution and smashing the principles Clause 42(3)(b) is binary, if not wholly myopic in its of subsidiarity asunder with the Bill. The further abstract assertion that there exists uniquely the need to disintegration of the UK was always going to be a maintain the integrity and smooth operation of the UK consequence of Brexit and the Bill merely hastens the internal market, as though that works in one direction essential crisis that the UK now faces. Although this is only. Without an agreement, the EU will, of course, in step with my own ambitions for the UK’s demise, have every legitimate claim to protect the completeness Scottish independence is close at hand with or without and integrity of its single market, so what is the takeaway the immediate impositions of the Bill, which my colleagues from that? It is border checks. and I will continue to oppose. The Northern Ireland protocol agreed by this Prime Minister in this Parliament in January this year is now Bambos Charalambous (Enfield, Southgate) (Lab): I to be rowed back on by this Bill. At one stage, we were shall speak against clauses 42 and 45 standing part of told that a border in the Irish sea would be the solution the Bill. to this, and now it turns out that that is as unlikely as it When five out of the last six leaders of the Conservative sounded. Brexiteers championed hollow assurances about party and all five living Prime Ministers are on the same technological solutions for the movement of goods, but side of the argument, it is time to sit up and take note. It could not identify a single instance around the world is not often that I agree with the right hon. Member for where that existed at scale. We were told this would be Maidenhead (Mrs May), but her remarks earlier in the achieved with good will on all sides, but I suggest that debate were absolutely right. The Bill’s attempt to enable 723 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 724 the UK to break an international agreement made in way whereby in the event that the implementation period good faith is both reckless and damaging. There have ends without a UK agreement we can still provide been protestations that the measures in the Bill would reassurance on the integrity of our internal market. The be used only if an agreement cannot be reached, but statement that EU negotiators made on 10 September, their price is the trashing of Britain’s reputation as an threatening, on the record, that the EU could control honest broker. The Bill will forever allow those regimes the movement of food from Great Britain to Northern that flout international law to counter any criticism and Ireland was a regrettable escalation. The reality is that point a finger back at the UK. Is that really a price we do not need to accept its interpretation of the worth paying? Of course it is not. protocol. The alternative in the face of unreasonable How did we get here? The withdrawal agreement demands is to state clearly our interpretation of what clearly made reference to the state aid rules in article 10 we agreed to when we signed the protocol. of the Northern Ireland protocol. The clue was in the As I highlighted in the debates last year—I also had title of the article—it was there in black and white: numerous meetings with the then Prime Minister and “State aid”. Did no one notice that section? Did no one the then Attorney General, and the ideas I promoted read that? If not, the Government are grossly negligent. were incorporated in the previous Prime Minister’s last We have learned that article 10’s impact was made fully suggestion—there is an instrument of diplomacy that known to Ministers at the time. Even if it was not can be applied to treaties of this kind and it is called an picked up in October, it was certainly referred to in “interpretative declaration”. Any party to a treaty can those January days when Parliament debated the European use this legal instrument on its own initiative. Toemphasise Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill at length before that, we refer to it as a unilateral interpretative declaration. passing it into law. If state aid was such a big deal, I am I am sorry to get into detail, but this is terribly important. surprised that Government Members who were so ebullient The law is important and we must uphold the law, in their support of the withdrawal agreement Bill are which is why I have concerns about the current direction now so eager to say it was flawed and explain why we the Government are taking. If the Germans have given must pass this Bill instead. Why did they not kick up a the world great music and the French have given it great fuss at the time? Where were they? pictures, we have given the world freedom under the Many from the Conservative party will say that the law, under parliamentary democracy, so we must remain measures in the Bill will be invoked only as a last resort, within the law. but even passing the Bill and allowing the Government to break international law is doing untold damage to The point is that there may be a way for the Government this country’s reputation. The United Kingdom is a to achieve their objective without breaking international signatory to and has ratified the Vienna convention. law. If the EU were to act on its threat, it would violate One of the principles that underpin that convention is our sovereignty—one of the most basic principles of negotiating in good faith. Passing this Bill will fly in the international law. This is what lawyers call an act of bad face of the Vienna convention and give a green light to faith in negotiations. It can also be called a manifestly other countries wishing to break agreements. With the absurd interpretation of the protocol, and under Government having taken this step, how will anyone international law no one is bound by an absurd ever trust anything that they say in negotiations ever interpretation of a treaty that is entered into in good again? Far from making trade deals easier, this legislation faith. If we use a unilateral interpretative declaration to has made negotiations much harder, with the United spell out our objections, the EU must respond by either States leading the outcry as it sees renegotiating the explicitly rejecting or implicitly accepting our interpretation. Northern Ireland protocol as a gross act of bad faith. If it rejects, it must formulate and justify an alternative interpretation. If the EU goes along with a unilateral The former Conservative leader Lord Howard was interpretative declaration made by the UK, it becomes right when he asked how the UK could reproach Russia, a legally binding joint interpretation. If the EU opposes China and Iran for their actions when the UK itself was our interpretation, we have at least strengthened our willing to break international law, as he lamented the negotiating position, pushed the EU negotiators on to damage to Britain’s reputation for probity and respect the back foot and gained a basis for appealing to EU for the rule of law. Perhaps the Bill’s intention is to national Governments for new instructions to be given ensure that we leave the transition period without an to EU negotiators. agreement. Perhaps it is a negotiation tactic, or perhaps it is designed to be a big distraction. Whichever one of Importantly, an interpretative declaration would hand those it may be, saying that the Bill breaks the law the EU a way out of the escalation, which is why I am “in a very specific and limited way”—[Official Report, 8 September putting this forward as a constructive idea to get us out 2020; Vol. 679, c. 509.] of the impasse we are in. So much of diplomacy is has diminished Britain’s global reputation. about saving face, and this would help the EU to do so, Just as conspiracy offences carry the same maximum while securing an agreement. We would not be reopening sentence as the original offence itself, even if the powers or unpicking the protocol; we would just be making a in the Bill were not used, the fact that the intention was small explanatory statement of our interpretation of there to do so is proof enough of bad faith. If the Bill what we had signed up to in good faith. Stage three of passes, even if the power to disapply is not used, irrevocable Brexit starts in January, when we will have established a damage has been done to Britain’sinternational reputation. series of new relationships between the UK, the Republic Once that reputation is lost it will be very hard to get of Ireland and the EU. There have been deep and bitter back. rifts over this, first about the backstop and then about the new protocol, but two major improvements have Sir Edward Leigh: I wish to speak to my amendment 42. taken place. First, we no longer have the backstop. I am optimistic that we can reach a deal for the benefit Secondly, the new arrangement will last only as long as of both the UK and the EU. My amendment outlines a it has the consent of the people of Northern Ireland. 725 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 726

[Sir Edward Leigh] I am long enough in the tooth to know that Committee of the whole House means that my remarks have to be Critics say, “Oh, but Northern Ireland is part of the focused on the specific clauses at hand, so I will not test UK. We will still be linked to the EU.” That is a valid your patience much longer, Dame Rosie, and will seek point, but what clear alternatives are they offering? to focus on part 5 of the Bill. Indeed, I will make We have a fundamental logical difficulty here. We have specific and limited references to clauses 40 to 45, but in three important goals, and it is difficult to see how they doing so, I wish to indicate my support for amendments 27, can all be reached compatibly but in full: first, we want 31 to 40, 44, 80, 88 and 89, in the name of my hon. to support the Belfast agreement; secondly, we want to Friends on the SNP Benches, and I will also support leave the customs union; and thirdly, we want a cohesive, new clauses 5 and 6 if they are put to a Division. sovereign, independent United Kingdom. We cannot I want to first deal with the issue of breaching reach each of those three goals in full simultaneously international law, which has been the source of much without a little bit of give and take, and that is all I am debate this evening and in recent weeks. Since this is the suggesting. We need to invoke the great British spirit of first time that I have participated in proceedings on the compromise. It may be called muddling through, but it Bill, I have had the opportunity to watch all of this play out, is what we do best. particularly on Second Reading last week, and I am still It is the same in the family of communities that is the not quite sure what to make of it, if I am truly honest. United Kingdom and the family of nations in the Part of me still finds it jaw-dropping and astonishing world. We need to make sacrifices in order to work that the Conservative party—once the party of law and together. With a little bit of malleability, making some order—is now openly flouting international law. But tweaks to the integrity of our internal market, we can then I realise that we have been here before, because this preserve the peace in Northern Ireland that has taken is a Government and a Prime Minister who do not so long to achieve. Equally, if we are making some respect or uphold the law. It is a timely reminder of the adjustments and sacrifices, the European Union needs events this time last year, when my hon. and learned to sacrifice its rigid attitudes. That is the compromise I Friend the Member for Edinburgh South West (Joanna propose, and I hope it is helpful to the debate. Cherry) forced the Government into the Supreme Court, which found their actions to prorogue Parliament “unlawful”, so should we be surprised at this Government 9.30 pm putting two fingers up to the judiciary? Ministers need David Linden (Glasgow East) (SNP): This is the first to think again, not just because it is morally wrong to opportunity I have had to speak on the Bill, which I break the law, but because it is also a clear breach of the have profound concerns about, so I want to use the ministerial code. David Anderson QC was bang on the early part of my remarks to lay out my clear objections money when he said: to the Bill. After that, I will seek to address part 5 of the “The Ministerial Code still mandates compliance with international Bill, which is the focus of our line-by-line scrutiny law, despite a change to its wording, as the Court of Appeal tonight. confirmed in 2018”. However, the controversy surrounding the clauses Like many colleagues from Scotland, I have grave before us tonight is not just about upholding the rule of concerns that the Bill is not only a slap in the face to the law, which is surely the most basic thing we would expect rule of international law but undermines the very from a permanent member of the UN Security Council. foundations of the devolution settlements, which are so Pushing ahead with this madness will have an impact precious to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. for post-Brexit Britain on the world stage. What does it That should not surprise the people of Scotland, who say about a post-Brexit global Britain that its first act as witnessed the Tories campaign vehemently against an independent state is to tear up the rules-based order? devolution in the 1997 referendum. The truth is that the I would argue that it sends a clear signal that Britain Conservatives and this Prime Minister in particular under Boris is giving two fingers up to not just international have never respected the devolution arrangements. As law but peace on the island of Ireland, and that is what my right hon. Friend the Member for Ross, Skye and worries me most about all this. Tory Ministers and Back Lochaber (Ian Blackford) reminded the House last week, Benchers appear, once again, to be playing fast and it was a former Daily Telegraph writer who wrote a loose with Northern Ireland, with little understanding tirade against devolution, saying: of the consequences for the fragile communities over “Devolution is causing all the strains that its opponents predicted, there, or indeed for the knock-on effect on trade. and in allowing the Scots to make their own laws, while free-riding on English taxpayers, it is simply unjust.” We know that pressing ahead with this reckless act is a sure-fire way of torpedoing any chance of a trade deal That former Daily Telegraph writer was, of course, the with the United States. How do we know that? Because current First Lord of the Treasury, the Prime Minister. the Americans have said so already. Take Nancy Pelosi, From the outset, I absolutely reject the Bill and will the Speaker of Congress, who said: vote against it at every opportunity until it is foisted on “The U.K. must respect the Northern Ireland Protocol as to the statute books by a Tory Government that people signed with the EU to ensure the free flow of goods across the in my country never voted for. But let us be crystal clear border. If the U.K. violates that international treaty and Brexit about the draft legislation before us and the consequences undermines the Good Friday accord, there will be absolutely no of it receiving Royal Assent. For a start, the Bill would chance of a U.S.-U.K. trade agreement passing the Congress.” undoubtedly lead to a race to the bottom on food and Most of us know that playing fast and loose with the environmental standards. Indeed, it creates more, not Northern Ireland protocol, as the Bill proposes, will less, uncertainty for businesses and makes the case that not end well, but imagine my surprise when I saw some the only way to truly defend the Scottish Parliament is tweets from the right hon. Member for Wokingham with the normal powers of independence. (John Redwood) suggesting: 727 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 728

“Trade deals are nice to have but not essential. We didn’t have a It seems to me that, despite the various attacks on the trade deal with the USA when in the EU. Getting back full Bill that we have heard, the case is now straightforward. control of our laws, our money and our borders is essential.” If the Government can convince the House that those I am a bit confused, because one caucus of the Tory on the other side in the negotiations have broken the party, headed up by the International Trade Secretary, rules, they can proceed. At that point, the Government says that Brexit is all about new opportunities for trade, have said, the dispute resolution procedures in the and Brextremists such as the right hon. Gentleman say withdrawal agreement will come into force, which I that trade deals are nice but not essential—all the while think is another sign of legal action. But the key point is the Government are playing fast and loose with peace that the Government will have to make the case to this on the island of Ireland. House that the EU has broken the agreement, not the The fact is that the Bill, and specifically the three UK. I am absolutely sure that that proposition will clauses before us, are a clear advert for what Brexit provoke a lively debate in this House, and indeed across Britain looks like: playing peace with Northern Ireland; the channel, but in the light of that debate we will then riding roughshod over devolution; a race to the bottom decide and we will make the law. If the Government on food and environmental standards; and two fingers cannot make the case that they are behaving properly, up to upholding the rule of law. People in Scotland can proportionately and legally, they will not convince the see that it is an advert for post-Brexit Britain, and do House. It seems to me that that is how law making not be surprised if they trade it in for independence should happen in this parliamentary democracy. and take back control the next time Scotland has the This is where I part company with my right hon. opportunity. Friend the Member for Maidenhead (Mrs May), who made a passionate and powerful speech. She said that Damian Green (Ashford) (Con): It is a pleasure to there was no difference between the Executive acting follow the hon. Gentleman. It is a sign of how fast and Parliament acting, but I do not think that is true. I moving these debates are that when I put into speak this think that there is much greater force in action taken evening I intended to support amendment 4 in the name knowingly by the House of Commons, particularly in of my hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst this context, when it is considering whether the Government (Sir Robert Neill), but before I got the chance to speak are acting lawfully. Putting that power in the hands of he had already indicated his intention of withdrawing the House of Commons is democratically proper and it. He is doing so for the best of reasons. It was an therefore legally proper. excellent amendment, and I am glad that the Government The Northern Ireland clauses of the Bill have not had have said that they agree with the thrust of it, so we can an easy passage, for good and serious reasons, but we discuss a different set of points. are now in a much better place with them than we were I know that many of my friends and colleagues a week ago, and I am now happy to support the abstained or voted against the Bill on Second Reading Government on this and on the Bill more generally. because of their doubts about part 5. I voted in favour because I think that the other 50 clauses are excellent and essential. The UK internal market is key to the Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) (Lab/ future prosperity of people in all four countries of the Co-op): It is always a pleasure to serve under your United Kingdom, and the principles of market recognition chairpersonship, Dame Rosie. During the passage of and non-discrimination are at the heart of the future the Bill, I have spoken extensively on the attacks on prosperity of our citizens in all parts of the UK. devolution, on the specific consequences for Northern Ireland and the Good Friday agreement, and indeed on However, I shared the doubts that many had about the failure of the Prime Minister to deliver on his clauses 42, 43 and 45—the essential parts of part 5 of oven-ready Brexit deal. the Bill—and I was quite shocked to hear a Secretary of State say that the UK Government were planning to I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for break the law, even in a specific and limited way. I had Sheffield Central (Paul Blomfield) for his speech, but I not ever expected to hear any Secretary of State say also wish to pay tribute to the right hon. Member for that, particularly not a Conservative one, so I am genuinely Maidenhead (Mrs May), the former Prime Minister, for delighted that the Government have taken over my hon. her comments. I have disagreed with her courteously on Friend’s amendment. I think that is a wise and pragmatic many issues over the years, but she is a person of thing for the Government to have done, and I am glad principle, public service and integrity. I am afraid that I to have played my part in the talks that led to it. cannot say the same about some of the others, including our current Prime Minister, our rubber stamp of an It is important that the House recognise that this is Attorney General or our now-compliant Lord Chancellor, more than just kicking the can down the road, if I can who once stood up for the rule of law during his time in revive one of the great clichés of 2018 political debate. practice in south Wales, but who now seems willing, in The Government amendment needs to be put in context his own words, to “fudge it”. Indeed, there are the with the public statement that the Government have contradictions of our Foreign Secretary, who one minute made on gov.uk and, indeed, some of the words that the is rightly arguing for international law and human Minister uttered in opening this debate, when he made rights, such as the Magnitsky sanctions and everything it clear that Parliament will be asked to support the use that goes with them, but the next minute is undermining of the provisions in the clauses, and any similar subsequent them. provisions, only in the case of the EU being engaged in a material breach of its duties of good faith and, in the I am afraid that the damage that the Government’s Government’sview,thereby undermining the fundamental statements have done to our reputation is incalculable. purpose of the Northern Ireland protocol, and giving The right hon. Member for Maidenhead, who is no examples of what that would involve. longer in her place, said 729 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 730

[Stephen Doughty] World Trade Organisation in Geneva. Ambassadors attend receptions out of embarrassment, and support is “frankly, my view is that to the outside world, it makes no generated from few other than the right-wing, authoritarian difference whether a decision to break international law is taken and homophobic Government of President Orbán of by a Minister or by this Parliament; it is still a decision to break Hungary. international law. This can only weaken the UK in the eyes of the world… It will lead to untold damage to the United Kingdom’s The UK currently does not have a single national on reputation.” any of the United Nations human rights treaty bodies— I agree with every word. zero. That is unprecedented in a place where once we were represented and influential. Just last week, we Wehave heard many powerful speeches, from Members were publicly challenged and, in my view, humiliated, at across the House, expressing deep concern about where the pledging event for candidates for the UN Human the Bill is taking us. I urge those who have stood up with Rights Council. Comments made included: principle and questioned the Government and put forward “As a prospective member of the Human Rights Council, one amendments to think again. The Prime Minister has crucial part of the role is to address violations of international repeatedly broken his word: he has broken it to the human rights law.” Taoiseach; he has broken it to our negotiating partners Recent comments by the UK Government “compromise in the European Union; and he has broken it to Members this role”. on his own side repeatedly. Do not trust him. We are putting our decent diplomats in hugely difficult, A number of arguments have been made that suggest embarrassing positions, but crucially ones that are not there are some sort of special exemptions in the Vienna influential and do not have a role for global Britain. We convention and various international treaties. That is do not have a role in the other organisations. That is simply not the case. The House of Commons Library— why there has been so much criticism of the Government’s neutral, respected and authoritative—has been very work, including by Amal Clooney—until recently the clear, saying that this is a far-reaching power to effectively UK Government’s special envoy on global media freedom allow the violation of and a distinguished human rights barrister at Doughty “any international obligation that may be engaged in the creation Street Chambers—who said that of regulations under clauses 42 and 43.” “I have always been proud of the UK’s reputation as a champion It notes that this is not limited specifically to a violation of the international legal order, and of the culture of fair of the Northern Ireland protocol but to play…However…it has now become untenable for me…to urge other states to respect and enforce international obligations while “all international obligations that may have legal implications in the UK declares that it does not intend to do so itself…It this context.” threatens to embolden autocratic regimes that violate international It also makes it clear that, under the Vienna convention, law with devastating consequences all over the world.” ‘“A party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as When we make arguments about the Sino-British justification for its failure to perform a treaty.’ This means that treaty over Hong Kong or the territorial integrity of this Bill cannot change the legally binding nature, in international Ukraine, when we say that those who have committed law, of the UK’s international obligations.” crimes against humanity and genocide should be brought It also makes it crystal clear that to justice, when we make arguments for a world trade “parliamentary sovereignty does not change the binding nature system—a legally binding international financial and of the UK’s international obligations.” trading system—about the Paris climate change agreement, It is there in black and white. or, in our own specific national interests, on Gibraltar, the Falklands and maritime claims, we are undermining our place on the world stage. That is what the Government 9.45 pm have done and are continuing to do. I urge all those Over the past six months, I have spoken to countless across the House of principle and conscience who believe senior diplomatic and military figures who are appalled in global Britain—we might have disagreements over at the decline of our reputation, our international standing other things—and believe that this is a country of fair and the influence of our soft power—of global Britain play and decency, which keeps its word and can be itself. They are appalled at the arrogance of a Government respected and influential, not to support these clauses who think they can simply impose their will, rather than and to speak out against this Bill. negotiate and act in the global, international sphere in Sir Bernard Jenkin: I am grateful to have caught your good faith with British dignity and the principle of fair eye, Dame Rosie, so that I can respond to some of the play.Wehave seen that in recent days, with the resounding comments that the right hon. Member for Ashford rebuff to the Foreign Secretary on every level from both (Damian Green) was just making. I respect that he feels sides of the United States Congress regarding this Bill. passionately about these matters, but to equate these It was knocked down by Members of the House of clauses with genocide or the annexation of territory Representatives and the Senate, and, of course, presidential against the will of a sovereign state is absolutely ridiculous. candidate Biden. It completely misunderstands the degree of doubt that Beyond that, it is worth looking at the wider reputational exists about what international lawmeans when interpreting damage that we are doing. The UK failed to get one of international agreements. its own elected to the International Court of Justice for the first time since world war two. We are losing votes Damian Green: My hon. Friend is ascribing the things heavily and routinely in key United Nations forums. We he most disagrees with to me—[Interruption.] No, he lost the election for the director-general of the World did say “my right hon. Friend the Member for Ashford”. Health Organisation. I am afraid to say that the candidacy I am sure that the hon. Member for Cardiff South and of the right hon. Member for North Somerset (Dr Fox) Penarth (Stephen Doughty) would wish to take ownership is widely seen as a joke in international circles at the of his own ideas. 731 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 732

Sir Bernard Jenkin: I apologise to my right hon. On 16 June, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Friend. His name was in my mind because it was on the stood at the Dispatch Box and said that the Government monitor before the hon. Member for Cardiff South and were “faithfully implementing”the withdrawal agreement, Penarth spoke. including the Northern Ireland protocol. Just 83 days It is important to see these clauses in the wider later, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland stood context. My heart sank when I picked up the first draft at the same Dispatch Box and said that, yes, the Bill did of the agreement, because this was not the departure break international law. This unprecedented political from the European Union that I had expected to see handbrake turn left everyone from a former Prime expressed in the text of the agreement; it was the same Minister to the United States Congress scarcely able to oppressive, impenetrable text with endless references to comprehend what they were hearing—namely, that the the treaties as they exist. The withdrawal agreement was United Kingdom was prepared to go rogue if it did not clearly a concerted attempt by the European Union to get its own way, and to ditch its own Northern Ireland continue its influence, even through the direct applicability protocol. It is a remarkable, not to say ludicrous, position and direct effect of European Union law on the United for a Government to find themselves in and one that Kingdom. suggests that this is a Government who have scant regard for the law and a particularly cavalier attitude to Kirsten Oswald: Will the hon. Gentleman give way? the Northern Ireland peace process, displaying as they do very little knowledge, understanding or care as to Sir Bernard Jenkin: No, I am not going to give way. I the consequences of their actions. am going to be very brief. I know that we live in strange times, but who would The important perspective is to ask ourselves how ever have thought that we would be debating whether a this debate is going to be regarded in 10, 20 or 30 years’ UK Conservative Government could knowingly break time. These controversies will be seen as the growing international law and that this House, led by the self-styled pains of the re-establishment of our national sovereign champions of law and order on the Conservative Benches, independence as a national democracy. I dare say that would be about to say that, yes, it could? Let them be in none of us has studied the debates on the Great Reform no doubt that, in doing so, they are signalling to the Act of 1832, but I bet they went through exactly the international community that the United Kingdom is a same kind of painful introspection that we have seen in bad faith actor,an untrustworthy partner whose adherence the Chamber this evening. Today we look upon the to international law is based solely on expediency. They 1832 Reform Act as a great stride towards the might want to ask themselves why—why would any democratisation of our constitution, and history will Government find the UK an attractive partner with look back at these debates in the same way and see this which to enter a legally binding trade deal in the future? moment in our history as the time that we decided to take back control of our own constitutional arrangements This is a United Kingdom Internal Market Bill, but it and our own national democracy. has already attracted international attention, and none of it has been good. Even the USA, on which much of I would go further than that. There is no doubt that the bright post-Brexit future has been predicated, has this Bill will get through this House intact, but some said that anything that undermines the Good Friday people are suggesting that there will be more of a agreement will have dire consequences for the UK, and problem in the other place. There will be those who that there will be no trade deal forthcoming. Did any continue to resist the consequences of leaving the European Conservative Member think that that would not be the Union and the consequences of having signed a highly case? Is anyone in this House unaware of the political unsatisfactory agreement that attempts to sustain the investment that the United States has in brokering influence of the European Union far beyond any legitimate peace in Northern Ireland? Did anyone think that, role it has in making the laws of our country. That is having worked so hard to secure a peace deal, the what we are talking about, in relieving ourselves of United States would just watch it crumble into dust these clauses. However, I can assure the House that, in when it proved to be an inconvenience to the UK the long run, nothing is going to stand in the way of Government? I tell you what, Madam Deputy Speaker, the British people re-establishing and reclaiming our if they did think that then, they certainly do not think it independence, and if the other place chooses to stand in now,because the Speaker of the House of Representatives, our way in that respect, I suspect that in the longer term Nancy Pelosi, declared that this UK Government must this House, as the democratic House, will prevail. respect the Northern Ireland protocol and that, if they violate it, there will be no chance of a US-UK trade Brendan O’Hara (Argyll and Bute) (SNP): There is so deal. That position was backed up by presidential favourite much wrong with this Bill that it is difficult to know Joe Biden, who said that any deal between the UK and where to start, but in the time I have available, I will the United States is contingent upon respect for the concentrate my remarks on clauses 40 to 45. Those are Good Friday agreement. The world is telling the UK: the clauses that allow this Government to break do not breach international law, do not become that international law and renege on the legally binding rogue state, because there will be consequences if you agreement that they themselves negotiated and signed do. up to less than a year ago—a fact that, try as they might, they can never escape from. I will also speak to This Bill confirms what many of us have suspected amendment 41, which deals with preserving the integrity for a long time: there is no long-term or strategic of the Good Friday agreement, on the basis of which thinking at the heart of this Government. Everything peace has been secured in the north of Ireland for more they do is based on expediency and is designed simply than two decades and which seeks to defend international to get them off whatever immediate and inconvenient law from a Government who believe that somehow, hoop they happen to be caught on. That such behaviour uniquely and exceptionally, it does not apply to them. inevitably leads to far bigger and more complex problems 733 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 734

[Brendan O’Hara] statement on 17 September is helpful up to a point, but it does in my view present a problem. Where one of the further down the line seems to matter little. They are unacceptable scenarios the Government have described like an errant child trying to avoid facing up to their occurs, that statement says that the Government would responsibilities and are prepared to say or do anything activate the appropriate formal dispute settlement to kick that further down the road and avoid the reckoning. mechanisms They have run out of road and been reduced to using “in parallel with the use of the provisions” the Good Friday agreement as a bargaining chip, and in these clauses. are on the brink of becoming an international law breaker. This Bill in its current form will see the United I am afraid it is the use of the phrase “in parallel with” Kingdom cross the Rubicon. It has embarked on a that causes me concern. course from which it cannot come back. The mask has I am not convinced that the world “in parallel with” slipped and any remaining shred of moral authority are consistent with the last resort that breaking international that the United Kingdom may have thought it had will law surely must be. It must be the case, must it not, that have slipped with it. The consequence of this Government’s the United Kingdom will do all within its power within action is coming to a head, and it is a disaster entirely of the provisions of the withdrawal agreement and the their own making. Northern Ireland protocol before stepping outside it. Given the reputational damage that a breach of Jeremy Wright: It is a great pleasure to follow the international law would undoubtedly do, that would hon. Member for Argyll and Bute (Brendan O’Hara). only be right. To be fair to the Minister, I thought I My reservations about clauses 42, 43 and 45 of the Bill heard him say at the beginning of this debate that in were expressed, I hope clearly, on Second Reading, so I that scenario the Government would use measures within do not need to repeat them. Those of us who have the agreement before using measures in the Bill. Again, reservations and understandable concerns about the that must be the right approach. But that needs to be effect on the rule of law of what the Government are reconciled, I am afraid, with the phrase “in parallel proposing need, I think, to answer one question, which with” in the Government’s statement on 17 September. is whether there are any conceivable circumstances in This matters, not because I believe that the Government which international law could properly be broken by should be obliged to follow through on an arbitration this country. I cannot come to the conclusion that there procedure beyond the last moment at which the are no conceivable circumstances in which that might be Government would be able to take unilateral action in the right course of action. If there were to be a fundamental the face of one of these very severe threats that we are threat to the social or economic fabric of this country discussing, but because there needs to be absolutely and breaking the international law was the lesser evil, I clarity that a breach of international law would be a can accept that that might be the right thing for this matter of necessity, not a matter of preference, and that country to do it, but if we were to contemplate such a everything possible would be done to keep within course of action three things would need to be true. international law,within the agreements we have negotiated, The first thing would be that there was specific authority before we feel the need, if we ever do, to step outside it. to break international law, not general latitude. It seems I am afraid that the Government still need to provide to me that we have made progress on that. I congratulate me, and I am sure other Members of this House, with my hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst greater clarity on that very important point. (Sir Robert Neill) and others on negotiating with the Government in the way that they have. I am delighted to Bill Esterson (Sefton Central) (Lab): I thoroughly see amendment 66 brought forward in the Government’s enjoyed the very thoughtful and well analysed speech name as a consequence; and as my right hon. Friend the from the right hon. and learned Member for Kenilworth Member for Ashford (Damian Green) said a moment and Southam (Jeremy Wright). I hope his hon. Friends or so ago, it is perfectly right that the House of Commons will listen very carefully to what he says, which is should have the opportunity to give its specific view on incredibly important. the specific circumstances that may obtain at that point. There are things I did not expect to be doing today. The first is to be quoting the right hon. Member for 10 pm Maidenhead (Mrs May), who spoke of the untold The second thing that I think would be required is damage to the UK’s reputation of implementing these that the circumstances were wholly exceptional. On clauses which will break international law as soon as that, again, we have made some progress. The statement they hit the statute book. Something else I did not the Government produced on 17 September, which has expect to be doing today, or ever, is quoting Margaret been referred to already in this debate, sets out some Thatcher. In 1975—before your time, Dame Eleanor—she examples of the type of behaviour on the part of the said: EuropeanUnionthatwouldtriggerthosewhollyexceptional “Britain does not renounce Treaties. Indeed, to do so would circumstances in the Government’s view. They almost damage our own integrity as well as international relations.” all relate to a breach of faith by the European Union, In 1982, Mrs Thatcher said of Britain’s role: and I would concede that they are, in that list, indeed “It is in upholding international law and teaching the nations of wholly exceptional. It is therefore helpful to see that list. the world how to live”. There is in my view, however, a third requirement on That last bit did not always go down so well, but, Dame top of the requirement for a specific sanction and in Eleanor, you take the point. Mrs Thatcher believed, as addition to exceptional circumstances, and that is that the right hon. Member for Maidenhead believes, in the there is no alternative to breaking international law. On rule of lawand in the importance of upholding international this, we do need absolute clarity.Again, the Government’s law at all cost. 735 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 736

That is without citing Lord Howard, Lord Hague or the one proposed by the Business Secretary or the one Lord Lamont, and I mention them along with the right that the International Trade Secretary would prefer, hon. and learned Member for Torridge and West Devon with renegotiation of World Trade Organisation state (Mr Cox), as former Members of this House, in three aid rules? Tell us, so that we can scrutinise and make cases, who are held in high regard, or used to be held in informed decisions before we vote on the provisions in high regard, by members of Conservative party. Then this Bill. we move on to the Confederation of British Industry: I mention trade deals, and we know from numerous Carolyn Fairbairn spoke of the damage to our reputation Members tonight and previously what the Speaker of and integrity. The Federation of Small Businesses in the House of Representatives has said and what the Northern Ireland made a plea to the Government for former Vice-President and, I hope, future President, has sensible implementation of the withdrawal agreement said about the prospect for those trade deals, given this and the Northern Ireland protocol, but its pleas have break of the Northern Ireland agreement and threat to fallen, so far, on deaf ears. the peace process. What is causing so much disquiet As we heard earlier, the damage was done when the about what Conservative Members signed and voted for Northern Ireland Secretary told the House, as he did last year? Why are they ignoring the senior people in last week or the week before now—time passes so their party and Margaret Thatcher? Why the Damascene fast—that the Government intended to break international conversion to state aid? Broken promises, breaking the law, albeit in a “specific and limited way”. The Vienna peace process and breaking the rule of lawand international convention is clear: it is not possible to use domestic law law—and they know it. as an excuse for breaking international law. Article 5 of the withdrawal agreement makes it clear that it is not Mr David Jones (Clwyd West) (Con): I am pleased to possible to do so, and Conservative Members all signed speak in support of the Bill, specifically part 5, subject up to it at a general election and in here when they to Government amendment 66. Part 5 proved controversial, voted for it. They used to say that they revered those even before we began proceedings this afternoon. I have elders of their party—many of them would still say they no doubt that my hon. Friend the Minister arrived in do with Margaret Thatcher, of course—so how did it the Chamber fully expecting that he would have to come to this? defend the Government against accusations of being in breach of their obligations under the withdrawal agreement, Stephen Doughty: My hon. Friend is making some and he has not been disappointed. incredibly powerful points. He is undoubtedly aware What has been frequently overlooked in today’s debate that today the world is celebrating the 75th anniversary is the fact that obligations under the withdrawal agreement of the United Nations. Does he find it curious that the move in two directions. There are obligations on both UK Government have signed up to a statement that sides. Specifically, the withdrawal agreement and the says: political declaration impose obligations on both the “We will abide by international law… We will abide by the European Union and the United Kingdom to use their international agreements we have entered into and the commitments best endeavours in good faith to negotiate expeditiously we have made”? the free trade agreement that will constitute their future Is there not some stark hypocrisy going on there? relationship. The political declaration provides that that relationship Bill Esterson: Hypocrisy, and nobody will believe it. must ensure the sovereignty of the United Kingdom No one will believe it because of their own words and, and the protection of its internal market. The sad fact is increasingly, their own actions. I am grateful to my hon. that negotiations have not proceeded expeditiously, and Friend for that example. it is more than arguable that the European Union has What is this for—customs clearances, and because of not used its best endeavours nor acted in good faith. a border in the Irish sea that the Government voted for? The EU, in fact, has refused to talk about anything Have they raised it with the Joint Committee, as my other than its so-called red lines of fisheries, the level hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central (Paul playing field and state aid. Time is rapidly passing, yet Blomfield) asked for the umpteenth time earlier? We the EU refuses to talk about anything else. If, as a would love to know in the wind-up. What of the dispute consequence of its intransigence and refusal to discuss resolution system and the binding arbitration they have things other than its red lines, we arrive at the point agreed to? Why is it no longer enough? Is this really where the negotiations fail and there is no free trade about state aid, and the Damascene conversion of a agreement, there will be potentially severe, adverse Conservative party that last year only spent 0.38% of consequences for the integrity of the United Kingdom’s GDP on subsidies, while in Germany the figure was internal market. Hardest hit will be Northern Ireland. 1.38% and in Portugal as much as 1.69%? Tell us To take one example, although the protocol says in what this wonderful new world of support for our terms that Northern Ireland is part of the customs industries that the Government are proposing is, so we territory of the United Kingdom, the protocol says that can scrutinise it. it is part of the EU’s customs territory, and potentially The Government are not very good at scrutiny, are the consequences are that goods passing from Northern they? We found that out on the Trade Bill, and we Ireland to Great Britain will be subject to what the hon. continue to do so. They deny any opportunity for Member for Belfast East (Gavin Robinson) described parliamentary scrutiny, and it is the same here with as bureaucratic and administrative borders. these customs clearances and state aid. When it comes That is despite the fact that article 6 of the protocol to state aid, we are now being told, although we cannot provides that nothing should prevent the United Kingdom see the detail, that the Japanese deal will have a different from ensuring unfettered market access for goods state aid regime from the one they are proposing. Is it moving from Northern Ireland to other parts of the 737 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 738

[Mr David Jones] There are a number of important amendments to this Bill, and I pay tribute to those tabled by my Front UK’s internal market. Part 5 of the Bill therefore sets Bench and others across the House. The Minister needs up a safeguard against such consequences, should there to be clear in winding up that amending this Bill and be no satisfactory conclusion to the negotiations on the stopping the shameless power grab will be a key focus of future relationship. this Government. The impact on the Belfast/Good Friday agreement is As today’s debate focuses largely on Northern Ireland, deeply worrying. The right for the people of Great I urge the Minister to be mindful of the fragile peace Britain and Ireland to trade freely was enshrined in holding that part of the country together. Last week, article 6 of the Acts of Union 1800. Those provisions the hon. Members for Foyle (Colum Eastwood) and for still apply to Northern Ireland—they are rights set up Belfast South (Claire Hanna) spoke movingly about under a constitutional statute. If the right of the people what peace has meant for Northern Ireland. Their of Northern Ireland to trade freely with the rest of the words must be heard loud and clear by Ministers. UK were to be changed without their consent, it would When thinking about the Northern Ireland protocol amount to a major breach of the core principle of the I was reminded of the wonderful work of our friend Belfast agreement. Lady Hermon, the former Member for North Down. In September 2019 she said in this Chamber: 10.15 pm “I think the Prime Minister owes the people of Northern Ireland some explanation of why he and his Government have None of the provisions of the Bill will take effect … until such time as the Secretary of State makes regulations treated the Good Friday agreement in such a careless and cavalier manner.”—[Official Report, 3 September 2019; Vol. 664, that they should. Government amendment 66 provides c. 46.] that no such regulations may be made until such time as they have been authorised by a vote of this House, and She was right then, and, sadly, she is still right today. the Government have made it clear that they will not I do not always agree with the right hon. Member for call a vote unless the EU is seen to be in material breach Maidenhead (Mrs May), but I want to thank her for her of its duty of good faith or other obligations. That, I brave speech today, as she focused on the issues the Bill believe, should give additional comfort to hon. Members throws up and how it will affect our standing in the rest who have been concerned about the impact of such of the world. regulations, but, to repeat, these provisions simply amount The current Prime Minister has called himself the to a safeguard against the potential consequences of Minister for the Union; I have to say that these days he there being no concluded agreement on the future looks like the Minister for disarray, and frequently relationship, and they are legitimised by section 38 of appears to be missing in action. A Government who the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020. were truly committed to the Union of the United Kingdom The best way to avoid their use is for the EU to perform would not propose this divisive legislation. They would its obligations under the withdrawal agreement and respect the devolved Administrations and the people negotiate with the UK to secure a free trade agreement. who live, learn and work in our devolved nations, and I believe that the Government are acting prudently in propose legislation with the informed consent of the the national interest in creating this safeguard against devolved Parliaments and Assemblies. the continued breach by the European Union of its The Tory shadow Counsel General in Wales said this obligations under the withdrawal agreement, and I therefore Bill risks seriously damaging the Union and resigned support part 5 of the Bill. from the Front Bench in the Senedd, and he was right to do so. If the Prime Minister will not take the same (Newport West) (Lab): It is a pleasure to dignified and objective stand as David Melding MS and serve under your chairmanship tonight, Dame Eleanor. resign, he must immediately stop trashing our international Let me start by being crystal clear that Opposition reputation, and must use however long he has left in Members firmly believe in the need for a strong internal office to start providing the good government my market so that businesses can trade freely across the constituents deserve. UK’s four nations. That trade is vital for our economy and our shared prosperity, but, as we have heard in (East Worthing and Shoreham) (Con): recent days as the House debates this Bill in Committee, It is always a joy to come in on the fag end of a debate, it must be an internal market based on a genuinely when so many people have said everything that needs to four-nation approach; it must not be a top-down framework be said and we have had a surfeit of lawyers on what is a imposed by Tory Ministers. very legalistic Bill—I am not one, thank goodness. By proposing mutual recognition without legally There is much good in this Bill. It is about the underpinning minimum standards, Ministers are ensuring continuity of trade and the integrity of the United that the lowest standard on food, the environment, air Kingdom, the principle of mutual recognition and the quality and animal welfare that is chosen by one legislative principle of non-discrimination of goods within the UK, House must automatically become the minimum standard and there is much practical stuff that, in the absence of across all four nations. As Member of Parliament for an early agreement with the EU, we need to do. However, Newport West, I have received many lengthyand passionate I have serious reservations about the inclusion of clauses representations from residents across my constituency. 41 to 45 because of the implications well beyond this It is clear that they want the highest possible standards, Bill, or indeed, well beyond our withdrawal process protected by our progressive Government, from the EU. They raise serious question marks about a demand that stands in stark contrast to the shameless race the intent and good name of the United Kingdom in to the bottom proposed by those on the Treasury Bench. being party to other international agreements. 739 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 740

When a Government Minister at the Dispatch Box trade and a trailblazer for free trade in particular. As states that the UK will be able to break the law, albeit in the former Attorney General put it, assenting to these a “specific and limited way”, parliamentarians should proposals prick up their ears and ask why and how, and demand “would amount to nothing more or less than the unilateral proper justification from the Government and the Ministers abrogation of the treaty obligations to which we pledged our to whom this part of the Bill gives considerable and word less than 12 months ago, and which this parliament ratified ongoing powers. When the Government published this in February.” Bill in a hurry, that justification, I feel, was just not If we do not like what we signed, there is an arbitration forthcoming from the Government, and on Second process, so finally, I am genuinely bemused about why Reading, I therefore could not support the Bill. I would these clauses have been brought forward now and what like to support the Government. I would like to support they were intended to achieve. There is nothing in the the Bill, but I need more assurances. Bill or in the Government amendments about them only Amendment 4, which was put forward by my hon. being used in extremis, after all those other routes have Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert been exhausted, and that includes the formal arbitration Neill) and which forced the hand of the Government process. If we are going to pre-empt that arbitration with Government amendment 66, certainly helps, although process by saying that we will not go to arbitration, why it just gives an additional check without removing the include an arbitration process, and if we do believe in powers reserved to the Government fundamentally. I an arbitration process but we will not follow the result if say this as a concerned Brexiteer, but this is not a it goes against us, that arbitration process is worthless question of leave or remain. It has no impact on the UK and pointless. leaving the EU fully after the end of the transition Why now? Why not when negotiations have not come period on 31 December, but it does have an impact, to a conclusion, if that is the case, despite the severe potentially, on how we carry on our business in the strain that this move has put on them? Why not nearer world beyond the EU after 31 December. 31 December, if it has become clear that a deal has not I think the EU has behaved disgracefully throughout been reached and the EU is determined to enact our the negotiation period. It has exploited shamelessly the worst-feared scenario? If this is a bargaining tactic, it unique position of Northern Ireland as our land border does not seem to have gone down very well. It has not with the EU but subordinate to the very important made negotiations any easier. It has not made a US status conferred on it by the Good Friday agreement. It trade deal any easier. It has not made any other trade has used all sorts of underhand tactics to promote its deals any easier. pet causes, to keep the UK under the control of EU If this really is a bargaining tactic, it is necessary to laws and regulations, be that British fisheries or state be able to deliver on it, and there are doubts about aid considerations and preventing us from being able to whether the Bill can get through the other place. I am compete fairly, which is all we ask. “Unless you give us afraid that I just do not understand it. I hope that what we want, we will impose checks and tariffs between before we vote, Ministers will make everything magically Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and there is nothing clearer. I may give the Government the benefit of the you can do to stop it”—runs the subtext of the negotiations. doubt, but if it comes back for the vote of the Commons— not the Lords, notably—and those questions remain It has now become clear that the EU is trying to unanswered, I will not be able to support a Bill that reinterpret the terms of the withdrawal agreement to retains these clauses unqualified. I hope that the Minister impose control over internal markets within the UK will prove me wrong. that no other country would tolerate and none has been required to agree to as part of any other EU trade deal. Of course, as we heard from many hon. Members, the Jim Shannon: It is a pleasure to speak on this issue. EU is no stranger to breaking international agreements This is an intricate matter that is not helped by those when that suits it, especially as regards the WTO. Has with little or poor understanding of the Belfast agreement, the EU really been negotiating an agreement in good or indeed of the truth of the troubles and our painful faith, especially when a precedent has already been set journey, using it as a political soundbite. Seeing Nancy of what was possible with a Canada-type deal? Pelosi, the Speaker of the US House of Representatives, being led by a reporter to outline the consequences of Despite all this, it does not, and should not, mean this Bill for US-UK trade relations would have been that we, the United Kingdom, have to follow suit and laughablehaditnothighlightedtheseveremisunderstanding act badly as well. The United Kingdom has a reputation that many people are under. for upholding the rule of law. The Conservative party has always had as one of its most cherished doctrines This Bill is not designed to tear up the Belfast agreement; the importance of upholding the rule of law, so I share, in fact, it is there to recognise that until the will of the for once, the concern of many lawyers who are worried people is to be Irish, we are to be considered British, that these clauses represent a significant risk of violation and we are to remain so until a border poll is carried of the UK’s international law obligations, including the out. That border poll has not been carried out yet. The principle of good faith and sincere co-operation; that Belfast agreement underlines the notion of consent; for the Northern Ireland protocol and associated case law us to have an absolutely separate rule for state aid and would have a subordinate role dependent on ministerial other trade and transport damages the very principle of interpretation; and that this would have potentially a consent in the Belfast agreement. That is the reason that serious impact on the reputation of the UK as a centre the Democratic Unionist party have tabled amendments for international legal practice and dispute resolution. on state aid—yet, for some, the message is not getting This would not go down well, given the professed through just yet. Clauses 45 to 50 are very clear in ambition of UK, quite rightly, to be a leader in global their purpose. 741 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 742

[Jim Shannon] 10.30 pm It is recognition of our legal principles that holds our The Ulster Farmers Union has also been very clear in Union together. Whether we celebrate the Boyne or the relation to the levels of state aid in clause 43. The rising, Robert I or Edward I, Llywelyn ap Gruffudd or Republic of Ireland has a responsibility to its constituents the Black Prince, we all know that this is a civic Union to secure the best deals and the best advantages, but let based on rules, not regiments, and we live together us be clear: it is not our friend. It is at best a friendly because together we consent. Prime Ministers and Taoisigh rival, and at worst simply a rival with a voice to implement have known for decades that consent matters because and effect change in Europe, against our voiceless efforts one day our Union may change. The Belfast agreement post Brexit. History has shown that when it comes to envisions that possibility, and the treaty that gives Dublin doing the right thing by refusing to allow criminals to a voice today could, one day, be used in reverse by take harbour over the border, it has no desire to help us Westminster. As a proud Unionist, I defend international as a nation. When I have listened to debates in the Dáil, law and the treaties that we have signed, because one I have never once come to the conclusion that it has our day we may need it to protect us. best interests at heart. The treaty that the Government are negotiating today That is why my colleagues and I tabled our amendments protects us as well. For 40 years, Brits have moved to ensure that the fears of the Ulster Farmers Union around and lived in EU states, and many businesses and others are not realised. How, for example, do we continue to rely on continental connections to prosper. allow fair trade for any of our dairy products when the They need to know that what comes next will enable mainland has state aid in place in the form of grants for them to plan their lives and futures. They need the law dairy farmers? The answer is that we simply cannot. to protect them. But the law must not just be predictable: That is why we need to change state aid through these it must be fair. This is where I have sympathy for the clauses tonight. Trade is at the core of our amendments. Government. Some in Brussels have treated these Clause 41, which supports the delivery of the UK negotiations as a legal game, forgetting that their intention Government’s commitment to unfettered access for is to build a common future, not simply to decide the Northern Ireland goods moving from Northern Ireland rules of membership. The simple fact that the Government to Great Britain, does so by precluding new checks, have felt the need to make such a blunt response to the controls or administrative processes on qualifying goods EU’s offers shows how much Ministers must feel that as they move from Northern Ireland to GB. It similarly they have failed to exert leverage at the table. The talks precludes the use of existing checks, controls or processes are fundamentally political, so could not a political being used for the first time, or for a new purpose or to a signal have been sent that did not allow Communist new extent. That does not show the destruction of the dictators in China to use our own words to mock us, or Belfast agreement, but it is necessary for the stability of see US leaders on both sides warn us of the risks that food supply and state aid. Without it, we will certainly we are running? Perhaps it was; I am sure that the see the destruction of our country. Government would be delighted to make that clear. As the EU sees it, the UK has committed to comply Of course, no agreements can ever be cast in stone. with applicable notification and standstill obligations. They are fundamentally made to enable the freedoms of That means that the ceiling put on state aid by the EU peoples in countries around the world to co-operate. still applies in Northern Ireland in relation to trade. We Most famously, President de Gaulle commented on the will be constrained under the Northern Ireland protocol end of treaties when he took France out of the NATO to a certain level of support for agriculture, only a command structure after only 20 years. “Treaties are certain proportion of which can be spent, for instance, like roses”, he said, “they last as long as they last.” But on coupled payments. With that in mind, I believe that to threaten this one so soon after signing must have Northern Ireland could be constrained by these very been a last resort. That, at least, is what the Government rules. That is why tonight we wish to support our are now telling us. The PM said that he had not consulted amendments and the clauses that the Government have the Foreign Office. Surely the Government must have put forward. We urge Members to do the same. considered the cost before taking this step. Now that so much of the damage is done, as has been (Tonbridge and Malling) (Con): I am set out today, the onus is on our Government to push delighted to follow my hon. Friend the Member for hard for an agreement, because, sadly, the EU will now East Worthing and Shoreham (Tim Loughton) and my be able to point at us if the talks fail. Whatever we say, right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Kenilworth too many will now believe that it was we who broke the and Southam (Jeremy Wright), who I very much agreed deal first, and this has put us at a disadvantage. We all with. know that the impact of a rupture will be felt very Today we are talking about the answer that Margaret keenly in , just as much as it will in Ulster, and we Thatcher gave to Dean Acheson’s famous question, now know, clearly, that many of our allies are deeply “What is Britain’s role in the world?” She was right: our concerned about what a failure of statecraft could national mission is upholding the rule of law. That mean. lesson served her and our nation exceptionally well. It With a parliamentary lock on these powers splitting gave moral legitimacy to the courageous defence of the Bill into two parts and giving us the time to see if British nationals in the Falkland Islands and strength the EU really has broken faith with the deal before to the treaty that she signed two years later with China allowing the Government to act, the Prime Minister has to protect British nationals in Hong Kong. Trust in the at least moved towards the point of reason, and he treaties allowed Margaret Thatcher to start down the road could go one step further. The Government should of peace in our own nation and conclude the Anglo-Irish restate what they have already agreed in public and in agreement with the then Taoiseach, Garret FitzGerald. print—that Britain will abide by the arbitration proceedings 743 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 744 set out in the withdrawal agreement. That would turn with Northern Ireland’s place in the UK internal market. the Bill into what it has been described as today by Clause 41 deals with unfettered access. Those should be Ministers—an interim measure in case of emergency. uncontroversial clauses and they should be uncontroversial Although it would still set out a way for Britain to be because they are explicitly referenced in the protocol free of unfair treaties, it would at least make it clear that itself, which states that this was to be used only in extremis. Perhaps that would “nothing in this Protocol prevents the United Kingdom from go some way towards restoring Britain’s reputation, as a ensuring unfettered market access for goods moving from Northern regrettable second best to the removal of these clauses Ireland to the rest of the United Kingdom’s internal market”. altogether. I recognise why the Government want this in As we have heard today, the protocol goes on to set parallel, but without accepting that the arbitration is out in high-level terms how we avoid a hard border on binding, it is simply a reversal of the treaty. We need our the island of Ireland, something that I am as committed word to count; global Britain depends on it. to today as I was the day I voted for Brexit. We heard eloquently from my hon. Friend the Member for South Mr Tobias Ellwood (Bournemouth East) (Con): I was Ribble (Katherine Fletcher) why that is so important. not expecting to participate in this debate, but I never The protocol also sets out that it is for the Joint Committee thought I would hear a Minister in this Chamber say to reach agreement on some of the specifics. It delegates that we might be breaching international law. I am decision making to that committee to finesse the detail grateful to Lords Howard and Lamont for quashing the and act in a way that is consistent with the protocol. myth that somehow those who speak against part 5 of The protocol requires both sides to negotiate in good the Bill are part of a tactic to support the EU or faith, protect the Good Friday agreement and reach a promote a remain cause. We have left the EU already. free trade deal, because ultimately that free trade deal is I voted for it, it was part of our manifesto and I what will prevent a hard border. That is what we are supported that. striving for, and that is what the clauses help to do. This debate is being watched far and wide, and I However, given the short time before the end of the spent last week speaking to counterparts from my Defence transition and that no free trade agreement has yet been Committee in the United States and to Washington agreed, we have to give thought to what happens if the DC, explaining to Senators and Members of Congress— EU takes an approach that is not in good faith. What if they were bewildered—that we will continue to honour it takes a maximalist approach to what goods are considered the Good Friday agreement. It is so important that we high risk or a maximalist approach to what would recognise what we have done in the past and where we constitute state aid that impacts the European Union? are today and that we do not damage our hard-fought The outcome of that decision would not only be a reputation. major impediment to Great Britain and Northern Irish We do not need the integrated review to understand trade, but would threaten our own integrity and the that the world is getting more dangerous. The threats Good Friday agreement. Are some seriously suggesting are getting more complex and more diverse. We are that in that scenario there should not be a means for the approaching great geopolitical change—an era of danger UK to respond? Are they suggesting we should look at that we have not seen since the cold war—and at the such a situation, shrug our shoulders and say international same time the west is becoming more risk-averse and law means we must surrender parts of our country? less consolidated in what we believe in and what we I heard the concerns from Members on both sides of actually stand for. As we fight hard to secure a deal, let the Committee about international law, but let us be us not forget who we are and what we fought for. We are clear on what we are not doing. I do not think that the the founding fathers of international democracy and of language has been helpful. We have heard references to the rule of law as well, so I am very pleased that the rogue states, to the Novichok poisoning on UK streets Government have conceded to grant Parliament a vote, and to Hong Kong citizens, but we are not breaking were the powers in this Bill ever to be considered, but I international criminal law. We are not breaking an am sorry that we have taken a very damaging route to international treaty on global security.Weare not breaking get here. a free trade agreement. We are saying that, having As we finally conclude Brexit, let us not lose sight of signed up to an agreement to fulfil a democratic mandate the international moral high ground. The world is once to the people of this country, which one side appears to again getting more dangerous. British leading leadership be using to undermine our constitutional integrity, we is once again in demand. Let us secure Brexit with our will stand resolutely as one country in pushing back. reputation repaired. We have values as a country, and yes, those include standing up for an international rules-based system, the Antony Higginbotham (Burnley) (Con): In rising to rule of law and democratic sovereignty, but when conflict support the Bill, I want to speak about clauses 40 to 45. arises, which it can do from time to time, Parliament I start by quoting from the manifesto that I proudly remains sovereign, and this Parliament will act in the stood on. It brought not just me to the House, but so interests of our Union. That position was reaffirmed in many of my colleagues. That manifesto said clearly: our own EU withdrawal Act, which recognised the “Wewill ensure that Northern Ireland’s businesses and producers sovereignty of Parliament. If this Parliament is sovereign, enjoy unfettered access to the rest of the UK and that in the implementation of our Brexit deal, we maintain and strengthen we must act for the constitutional integrity of our country, the integrity and smooth operation of our internal market.” and for that reason, I will be supporting this Bill. Kirsten Oswald: Will the hon. Gentleman give way? Mr Robin Walker: We have heard passionate speeches from both sides of the debate and from a range of Antony Higginbotham: I will not, because I am short colleagues across the political spectrum in Northern on time. The clauses we are talking about today do Ireland and across the UK. I will not be able to take exactly what we said in the manifesto. Clause 40 deals interventions because of the short time available. 745 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 746

[Mr Robin Walker] those brought forward by the Government, to ensure the peace and prosperity of Northern Ireland and our In response to the specific question from the hon. whole United Kingdom. Member for Sheffield Central (Paul Blomfield), although Question put and agreed to. I will not go into the detail of Joint Committee discussions, Clause 11 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. I can confirm that we certainly have raised the issue of state aid. We, of course, want to see that resolved through the Joint Committee, as we have repeatedly set Clause 40 out. I recognise the significant concerns raised by my right NORTHERN IRELAND’S PLACE IN THE UK INTERNAL hon. Friend the Member for Staffordshire Moorlands MARKET AND CUSTOMS TERRITORY (Karen Bradley) and others across the Committee, which Amendment proposed: 41, page 31, line 16, at end is why we have agreed that the break-glass provision insert— should be included in the Bill, requiring the House of ‘(1A) When exercising any functions covered by this Part, any Commons to give its approval before these measures are appropriate authority has a paramount duty— commenced. My hon. Friend the Member for Gillingham (a) to act without prejudice to all international and and Rainham (Rehman Chishti) asked an important domestic law, including the Withdrawal Agreement; question, and we will, of course, ensure that the House (b) to address the unique circumstances on the island of has the opportunity to debate matters in full before Ireland; voting on commencement of these provisions. (c) to maintain the necessary conditions for continued North-South cooperation; As my hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and (d) to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland; Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill) has made clear, if we (e) to protect the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement in all its reach that point, the Government will have to make a dimensions.” —(Stephen Farry.) persuasive case to the House. We published a statement This amendment is intended to provide a safeguard so that any last week saying that we will ask Parliament to support actions with respect to Part 5 of the Bill must be consistent with the use of provisions in the Bill only in the case of the relevant existing international and domestic law commitments, EU being engaged in a material breach of its duties of including the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement and its good faith and thereby undermining the fundamental Ireland/Northern Ireland Protocol. purpose of the Northern Ireland protocol. The Committee divided: Ayes 255, Noes 346. As I set out earlier, let me reassure Members that the Division No. 100] [10.44 pm Government are absolutely committed to implementing the withdrawal agreement and the Northern Ireland AYES protocol, meeting our obligations to secure the peace Abbott, rh Ms Diane Campbell, rh Sir Alan process. We continue to work with the EU in the Joint Ali, Rushanara Carden, Dan Committee to resolve outstanding issues with the Northern Ali, Tahir Champion, Sarah Ireland protocol, as the Prime Minister has set out. Allin-Khan, Dr Rosena Chapman, Douglas However, as a responsible Government, we cannot allow Amesbury, Mike Charalambous, Bambos the economic integrity of the UK’s internal market to Anderson, Fleur Cherry, Joanna be inadvertently compromised by unintended consequences Antoniazzi, Tonia Clark, Feryal of the protocol. The protocol was designed as a way of Ashworth, Jonathan Cooper, Daisy implementing the needs of our exit from the EU in a Bardell, Hannah Cooper, Rosie way that worked for Northern Ireland, and in particular Barker, Paula Cooper, rh Yvette for maintaining the Belfast/Good Friday agreement, Beckett, rh Margaret Corbyn, rh Jeremy the gains of the peace process and the delicate balance Begum, Apsana Cowan, Ronnie that that reflects between both communities’ interests. Benn, rh Hilary Coyle, Neil It explicitly depends on the consent of the people of Betts, Mr Clive Crawley, Angela Black, Mhairi Creasy, Stella Northern Ireland for its continued existence. Blackford, rh Ian Cruddas, Jon We are taking limited and reasonable steps to create a Blackman, Kirsty Cryer, John legal safety net by taking powers in reserve, whereby Blake, Olivia Cummins, Judith Ministers can guarantee the integrity of our United Blomfield, Paul Cunningham, Alex Kingdom and ensure that the Government are always Bonnar, Steven Daby, Janet able to deliver on their commitments to the people of Brabin, Tracy Davey, rh Sir Edward Northern Ireland. As my hon. Friend the Member for Bradshaw, rh Mr Ben David, Wayne Brennan, Kevin Davies, Geraint South Ribble (Katherine Fletcher) said in an excellent Brock, Deidre Davies-Jones, Alex speech, one of those commitments is to the sustained Brown, Alan Day, Martyn economic growth of Northern Ireland. Brown, Ms Lyn De Cordova, Marsha These limited steps deliver on the commitments that Brown, rh Mr Nicholas Debbonaire, Thangam the Government made in their general election manifesto— Bryant, Chris Dhesi, Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Buck, Ms Karen Docherty-Hughes, Martin the manifesto on which every Government Member Burgon, Richard Dodds, Anneliese was returned. They deliver on the commitments made Butler, Dawn Doogan, Dave in the Command Paper published in May, and they Byrne, Ian Dorans, Allan deliver on the promises made by this Government and Byrne, rh Liam Doughty, Stephen our predecessor to provide unfettered access between Cadbury, Ruth Dowd, Peter Northern Ireland and Great Britain. I therefore urge Callaghan, Amy Dromey, Jack Members to vote against all amendments, other than Cameron, Dr Lisa Duffield, Rosie 747 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 748

Eagle, Ms Angela Lloyd, Tony Slaughter, Andy Timms, rh Stephen Eagle, Maria Long Bailey, Rebecca Smith, Alyn Trickett, Jon Eastwood, Colum Lucas, Caroline Smith, Cat Turner, Karl Edwards, Jonathan Lynch, Holly Smith, Jeff Twigg, Derek Efford, Clive MacAskill, Kenny Smith, Nick Twist, Liz Elliott, Julie MacNeil, Angus Brendan Smyth, Karin Vaz, rh Valerie Elmore, Chris Madders, Justin Sobel, Alex Webbe, Claudia Eshalomi, Florence Mahmood, Mr Khalid Spellar, rh John Western, Matt Esterson, Bill Mahmood, Shabana Stephens, Chris Whitehead, Dr Alan Evans, Chris Malhotra, Seema Stevens, Jo Whitford, Dr Philippa Farron, Tim Maskell, Rachael Stone, Jamie Whitley, Mick Farry, Stephen Matheson, Christian Streeting, Wes Whittome, Nadia Fellows, Marion Mc Nally, John Sultana, Zarah Williams, Hywel Ferrier, Margaret McCabe, Steve Tami, rh Mark Wilson, Munira Fletcher, Colleen McCarthy, Kerry Tarry, Sam Winter, Beth Flynn, Stephen McDonald, Andy Thewliss, Alison Wishart, Pete Foxcroft, Vicky McDonald, Stewart Malcolm Thomas, Gareth Yasin, Mohammad Foy, Mary Kelly McDonald, Stuart C. Thomas-Symonds, Nick Zeichner, Daniel Furniss, Gill McDonnell, rh John Thompson, Owen Tellers for the Ayes: Gardiner, Barry McFadden, rh Mr Pat Thomson, Richard Mr Alistair Carmichael and Gibson, Patricia McGinn, Conor Thornberry, rh Emily Wendy Chamberlain Gill, Preet Kaur McGovern, Alison Glindon, Mary McKinnell, Catherine Grady, Patrick McLaughlin, Anne NOES Grant, Peter McMahon, Jim Adams, Nigel Burghart, Alex Gray, Neil McMorrin, Anna Afolami, Bim Burns, rh Conor Green, Kate Mearns, Ian Afriyie, Adam Butler, Rob Greenwood, Lilian Miliband, rh Edward Ahmad Khan, Imran Cairns, rh Alun Greenwood, Margaret Mishra, Navendu Aiken, Nickie Campbell, Mr Gregory Griffith, Nia Monaghan, Carol Aldous, Peter Carter, Andy Gwynne, Andrew Moran, Layla Allan, Lucy Cartlidge, James Haigh, Louise Morden, Jessica Amess, Sir David Cash, Sir William Hamilton, Fabian Morgan, Stephen Anderson, Lee Cates, Miriam Hanna, Claire Morris, Grahame Anderson, Stuart Caulfield, Maria Hanvey, Neale Murray, Ian Andrew, Stuart Chalk, Alex Hardy, Emma Murray, James Ansell, Caroline Chishti, Rehman Harman, rh Ms Harriet Nandy, Lisa Argar, Edward Chope, Sir Christopher Harris, Carolyn Newlands, Gavin Atherton, Sarah Churchill, Jo Hayes, Helen Nichols, Charlotte Atkins, Victoria Clark, rh Greg Healey, rh John Nicolson, John Bacon, Gareth Clarke, Mr Simon Hendrick, Sir Mark Norris, Alex Bacon, Mr Richard Clarke, Theo Hendry, Drew O’Hara, Brendan Badenoch, Kemi Clarke-Smith, Brendan Hill, Mike Olney, Sarah Bailey, Shaun Clarkson, Chris Hillier, Meg Onwurah, Chi Baillie, Siobhan Cleverly, rh James Hobhouse, Wera Oppong-Asare, Abena Baker, Duncan Clifton-Brown, Sir Geoffrey Hodge, rh Dame Margaret Osamor, Kate Baker, Mr Steve Coffey, rh Dr Thérèse Hodgson, Mrs Sharon Osborne, Kate Baldwin, Harriett Colburn, Elliot Hopkins, Rachel Oswald, Kirsten Barclay, rh Steve Collins, Damian Hosie, Stewart Owatemi, Taiwo Baron, Mr John Costa, Alberto Howarth, rh Sir George Owen, Sarah Baynes, Simon Courts, Robert Huq, Dr Rupa Peacock, Stephanie Bell, Aaron Coutinho, Claire Hussain, Imran Pennycook, Matthew Benton, Scott Crabb, rh Stephen Jardine, Christine Perkins, Mr Toby Beresford, Sir Paul Crosbie, Virginia Johnson, Dame Diana Phillips, Jess Berry, rh Jake Crouch, Tracey Johnson, Kim Phillipson, Bridget Bhatti, Saqib Daly, James Jones, Darren Pollard, Luke Blackman, Bob Davies, David T. C. Jones, Gerald Powell, Lucy Bone, Mr Peter Davies, Gareth Jones, rh Mr Kevan Qureshi, Yasmin Bottomley, Sir Peter Davies, Dr James Jones, Ruth Rayner, Angela Bowie, Andrew Davies, Mims Jones, Sarah Reed, Steve Bradley, Ben Davis, rh Mr David Kane, Mike Rees, Christina Bradley, rh Karen Davison, Dehenna Keeley, Barbara Reeves, Ellie Braverman, rh Suella Dinenage, Caroline Kendall, Liz Reynolds, Jonathan Brereton, Jack Dines, Miss Sarah Khan, Afzal Ribeiro-Addy, Bell Bridgen, Andrew Djanogly, Mr Jonathan Kinnock, Stephen Rimmer, Ms Marie Brine, Steve Donaldson, rh Sir Jeffrey M. Kyle, Peter Rodda, Matt Bristow, Paul Donelan, Michelle Lake, Ben Russell-Moyle, Lloyd Britcliffe, Sara Double, Steve Lammy, rh Mr David Saville Roberts, rh Liz Brokenshire, rh James Dowden, rh Oliver Lavery, Ian Sharma, Mr Virendra Browne, Anthony Doyle-Price, Jackie Law, Chris Sheerman, Mr Barry Bruce, Fiona Drax, Richard Lewis, Clive Sheppard, Tommy Buchan, Felicity Drummond, Mrs Flick Linden, David Siddiq, Tulip Buckland, rh Robert Duddridge, James 749 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 750

Duguid, David Hunt, Jane Mullan, Dr Kieran Smith, Royston Duncan Smith, rh Sir Iain Hunt, rh Jeremy Mumby-Croft, Holly Solloway, Amanda Dunne, rh Philip Hunt, Tom Mundell, rh David Spencer, Dr Ben Eastwood, Mark Jack, rh Mr Alister Murrison, rh Dr Andrew Spencer, rh Mark Edwards, Ruth Javid, rh Sajid Neill, Sir Robert Stafford, Alexander Ellis, rh Michael Jayawardena, Mr Ranil Nici, Lia Stephenson, Andrew Ellwood, rh Mr Tobias Jenkin, Sir Bernard Nokes, rh Caroline Stevenson, Jane Elphicke, Mrs Natalie Jenkyns, Andrea Norman, rh Jesse Stevenson, John Eustice, rh George Jenrick, rh Robert O’Brien, Neil Stewart, Bob Evans, Dr Luke Johnson, Dr Caroline Offord, Dr Matthew Stewart, Iain Evennett, rh Sir David Johnson, Gareth Opperman, Guy Stride, rh Mel Everitt, Ben Johnston, David Paisley, Ian Stuart, Graham Fabricant, Michael Jones, Andrew Parish, Neil Sturdy, Julian Farris, Laura Jones, rh Mr David Patel, rh Priti Sunderland, James Fell, Simon Jones, Fay Paterson, rh Mr Owen Swayne, rh Sir Desmond Fletcher, Katherine Jones, Mr Marcus Pawsey, Mark Syms, Sir Robert Fletcher, Mark Jupp, Simon Penning, rh Sir Mike Thomas, Derek Fletcher, Nick Kawczynski, Daniel Penrose, John Timpson, Edward Ford, Vicky Kearns, Alicia Percy, Andrew Tolhurst, Kelly Foster, Kevin Keegan, Gillian Philp, Chris Tomlinson, Justin Francois, rh Mr Mark Knight, rh Sir Greg Pincher, rh Christopher Tomlinson, Michael Frazer, Lucy Knight, Julian Poulter, Dr Dan Trevelyan, rh Anne-Marie Freeman, George Kruger, Danny Pow, Rebecca Trott, Laura Freer, Mike Kwarteng, rh Kwasi Prentis, Victoria Tugendhat, Tom Fuller, Richard Lamont, John Pursglove, Tom Vara, Mr Shailesh Fysh, Mr Marcus Largan, Robert Quin, Jeremy Vickers, Martin Garnier, Mark Latham, Mrs Pauline Quince, Will Vickers, Matt Ghani, Ms Nusrat Leadsom, rh Andrea Randall, Tom Villiers, rh Theresa Gibb, rh Nick Leigh, rh Sir Edward Redwood, rh John Wakeford, Christian Gibson, Peter Levy, Ian Rees-Mogg, rh Mr Jacob Walker, Mr Robin Gideon, Jo Lewer, Andrew Richards, Nicola Wallace, rh Mr Ben Gillan, rh Dame Cheryl Lewis, rh Brandon Richardson, Angela Girvan, Paul Lewis, rh Dr Julian Roberts, Rob Wallis, Dr Jamie Glen, John Liddell-Grainger, Mr Ian Robertson, Mr Laurence Warburton, David Goodwill, rh Mr Robert Lockhart, Carla Robinson, Gavin Warman, Matt Graham, Richard Loder, Chris Robinson, Mary Watling, Giles Grant, Mrs Helen Logan, Mark Rosindell, Andrew Webb, Suzanne Gray, James Longhi, Marco Ross, Douglas Whately, Helen Grayling, rh Chris Lopez, Julia Rowley, Lee Wheeler, Mrs Heather Green, Chris Lopresti, Jack Russell, Dean Whittaker, Craig Green, rh Damian Lord, Mr Jonathan Rutley, David Whittingdale, rh Mr John Griffith, Andrew Loughton, Tim Sambrook, Gary Wiggin, Bill Griffiths, Kate Mackinlay, Craig Saxby, Selaine Wild, James Grundy, James Mackrory, Cherilyn Scully, Paul Williams, Craig Gullis, Jonathan Maclean, Rachel Seely, Bob Williamson, rh Gavin Halfon, rh Robert Mak, Alan Selous, Andrew Wilson, rh Sammy Hall, Luke Malthouse, Kit Shannon, Jim Wood, Mike Hammond, Stephen Mangnall, Anthony Shapps, rh Grant Wragg, Mr William Hands, rh Greg Mann, Scott Sharma, rh Alok Wright, rh Jeremy Harper, rh Mr Mark Marson, Julie Shelbrooke, rh Alec Young, Jacob Harris, Rebecca Mayhew, Jerome Simmonds, David Zahawi, Nadhim Harrison, Trudy Maynard, Paul Skidmore, rh Chris Hart, Sally-Ann McCartney, Jason Smith, Chloe Tellers for the Noes: Hart, rh Simon McCartney, Karl Smith, Greg Maggie Throup and Hayes, rh Sir John McPartland, Stephen Smith, Henry Heald, rh Sir Oliver Menzies, Mark Heappey, James Mercer, Johnny Question accordingly negatived. Heaton-Harris, Chris Merriman, Huw Henderson, Gordon Metcalfe, Stephen The list of Members currently certified as eligible for Henry, Darren Millar, Robin a proxy vote, and of the Members nominated as their Higginbotham, Antony Milling, rh Amanda proxy, is published at the end of today’s debates. Hinds, rh Damian Mills, Nigel 10.59 pm Holden, Mr Richard Mitchell, rh Mr Andrew Proceedingsinterrupted(ProgrammeOrder,14September). Hollinrake, Kevin Mohindra, Mr Gagan Hollobone, Mr Philip Moore, Damien The Chair put forthwith the Questions necessary for Holloway, Adam Moore, Robbie the disposal of the business to be concluded at that time Holmes, Paul Mordaunt, rh Penny (Standing Order No. 83D). Howell, John Morris, Anne Marie Amendment proposed: 68, in clause 40, page 31, line 16, at Howell, Paul Morris, David end insert— Huddleston, Nigel Morris, James ‘(1A) Regulations that would introduce new requirements for Hudson, Dr Neil Morrissey, Joy goods traded from Great Britain to Northern Ireland may not Hughes, Eddie Morton, Wendy come into force without the consent of the Northern Ireland Assembly. 751 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 752

(1B) No additional official or administrative costs consequent Dunne, rh Philip Hudson, Dr Neil on any regulations of the kind mentioned in subsection (1A) may Eastwood, Colum Hughes, Eddie be recouped from the private sector.—(Sir Jeffrey M. Donaldson.) Eastwood, Mark Hunt, Jane The intention of this amendment is to require the consent Edwards, Ruth Hunt, rh Jeremy of the Northern Ireland Assembly before trade frictions Ellis, rh Michael Hunt, Tom are imposed on goods traded from Great Britain to Northern Ellwood, rh Mr Tobias Jack, rh Mr Alister Ireland, and to protect Northern Ireland businesses from Elphicke, Mrs Natalie Jardine, Christine Eustice, rh George Javid, rh Sajid paying for any new administrative costs. Evans, Dr Luke Jayawardena, Mr Ranil The Committee divided: Ayes 6, Noes 350. Evennett, rh Sir David Jenkin, Sir Bernard Division No. 101] [10.59 pm Everitt, Ben Jenkyns, Andrea Fabricant, Michael Jenrick, rh Robert Farris, Laura Johnson, Dr Caroline AYES Farron, Tim Johnson, Gareth Donaldson, rh Sir Jeffrey M. Wilson, rh Sammy Farry, Stephen Johnston, David Girvan, Paul Fell, Simon Jones, Andrew Lockhart, Carla Tellers for the Ayes: Fletcher, Katherine Jones, rh Mr David Paisley, Ian Mr Gregory Campbell and Fletcher, Mark Jones, Fay Shannon, Jim Gavin Robinson Fletcher, Nick Jones, Mr Marcus Ford, Vicky Jupp, Simon NOES Foster, Kevin Kawczynski, Daniel Francois, rh Mr Mark Kearns, Alicia Adams, Nigel Butler, Rob Frazer, Lucy Keegan, Gillian Afolami, Bim Cairns, rh Alun Freeman, George Knight, rh Sir Greg Afriyie, Adam Carmichael, rh Mr Alistair Freer, Mike Knight, Julian Ahmad Khan, Imran Carter, Andy Fuller, Richard Kruger, Danny Aiken, Nickie Cartlidge, James Fysh, Mr Marcus Kwarteng, rh Kwasi Aldous, Peter Cash, Sir William Garnier, Mark Lamont, John Allan, Lucy Cates, Miriam Ghani, Ms Nusrat Largan, Robert Amess, Sir David Caulfield, Maria Gibb, rh Nick Latham, Mrs Pauline Anderson, Lee Chalk, Alex Gibson, Peter Leadsom, rh Andrea Anderson, Stuart Chamberlain, Wendy Gideon, Jo Leigh, rh Sir Edward Andrew, Stuart Chishti, Rehman Gillan, rh Dame Cheryl Levy, Ian Ansell, Caroline Chope, Sir Christopher Glen, John Lewer, Andrew Argar, Edward Churchill, Jo Goodwill, rh Mr Robert Lewis, rh Brandon Atherton, Sarah Clark, rh Greg Graham, Richard Lewis, rh Dr Julian Atkins, Victoria Clarke, Mr Simon Grant, Mrs Helen Liddell-Grainger, Mr Ian Bacon, Gareth Clarke, Theo Gray, James Loder, Chris Bacon, Mr Richard Clarke-Smith, Brendan Grayling, rh Chris Logan, Mark Badenoch, Kemi Clarkson, Chris Green, Chris Longhi, Marco Bailey, Shaun Cleverly, rh James Green, rh Damian Lopez, Julia Baillie, Siobhan Clifton-Brown, Sir Geoffrey Griffith, Andrew Lopresti, Jack Baker, Duncan Coffey, rh Dr Thérèse Griffiths, Kate Lord, Mr Jonathan Baker, Mr Steve Colburn, Elliot Grundy, James Loughton, Tim Baldwin, Harriett Collins, Damian Gullis, Jonathan Mackinlay, Craig Barclay, rh Steve Cooper, Daisy Halfon, rh Robert Mackrory, Cherilyn Baron, Mr John Costa, Alberto Hall, Luke Maclean, Rachel Baynes, Simon Courts, Robert Hammond, Stephen Mak, Alan Bell, Aaron Coutinho, Claire Hands, rh Greg Malthouse, Kit Benton, Scott Crabb, rh Stephen Hanna, Claire Mangnall, Anthony Beresford, Sir Paul Crosbie, Virginia Harper, rh Mr Mark Mann, Scott Berry, rh Jake Crouch, Tracey Harris, Rebecca Marson, Julie Bhatti, Saqib Daly, James Harrison, Trudy Mayhew, Jerome Blackman, Bob Davey, rh Sir Edward Hart, Sally-Ann Maynard, Paul Bone, Mr Peter Davies, David T. C. Hart, rh Simon McCartney, Jason Bottomley, Sir Peter Davies, Gareth Hayes, rh Sir John McCartney, Karl Bowie, Andrew Davies, Dr James Heald, rh Sir Oliver McPartland, Stephen Bradley, Ben Davies, Mims Heappey, James Menzies, Mark Bradley, rh Karen Davis, rh Mr David Heaton-Harris, Chris Mercer, Johnny Braverman, rh Suella Davison, Dehenna Henderson, Gordon Merriman, Huw Brereton, Jack Dinenage, Caroline Henry, Darren Metcalfe, Stephen Bridgen, Andrew Dines, Miss Sarah Higginbotham, Antony Millar, Robin Brine, Steve Djanogly, Mr Jonathan Hinds, rh Damian Milling, rh Amanda Bristow, Paul Donelan, Michelle Hobhouse, Wera Mills, Nigel Britcliffe, Sara Double, Steve Holden, Mr Richard Mitchell, rh Mr Andrew Brokenshire, rh James Dowden, rh Oliver Hollinrake, Kevin Mohindra, Mr Gagan Browne, Anthony Doyle-Price, Jackie Hollobone, Mr Philip Moore, Damien Bruce, Fiona Drax, Richard Holloway, Adam Moore, Robbie Buchan, Felicity Drummond, Mrs Flick Holmes, Paul Moran, Layla Buckland, rh Robert Duddridge, James Howell, John Mordaunt, rh Penny Burghart, Alex Duguid, David Howell, Paul Morris, Anne Marie Burns, rh Conor Duncan Smith, rh Sir Iain Huddleston, Nigel Morris, David 753 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 754

Morris, James Smith, Henry “(e) is necessary for the purpose of dealing with a threat to Morrissey, Joy Smith, Royston biosecurity in Great Britain.” Morton, Wendy Solloway, Amanda This amendment introduces additional exceptions to the restriction Mullan, Dr Kieran Spencer, Dr Ben in clause 41(1). The exceptions are for any exercise of functions Mumby-Croft, Holly Spencer, rh Mark that is necessary for the purposes of VAT or excise duty in consequence Mundell, rh David Stafford, Alexander of the Northern Ireland Protocol; or necessary to deal with a threat Murray, Mrs Sheryll Stephenson, Andrew to biosecurity (human, animal or plant health). Murrison, rh Dr Andrew Stevenson, Jane Amendment 62, page 32, line 22, at end insert— Neill, Sir Robert Stevenson, John Nici, Lia Stewart, Bob ‘(3A) For the purposes of this section the exercise of a Nokes, rh Caroline Stewart, Iain function “is necessary for the purposes of VAT or excise duty in Norman, rh Jesse Stone, Jamie consequence of the Northern Ireland Protocol” if— O’Brien, Neil Stride, rh Mel (a) the appropriate authority exercising the function is the Offord, Dr Matthew Stuart, Graham Treasury, the Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Olney, Sarah Sturdy, Julian Revenue and Customs, or the Director of Border Opperman, Guy Sunderland, James Revenue, Parish, Neil Swayne, rh Sir Desmond (b) the function is exercised for the purposes of VAT or Paterson, rh Mr Owen Syms, Sir Robert excise duty (including for the purposes of preventing Pawsey, Mark Thomas, Derek double taxation, partial or complete non-taxation, or Penning, rh Sir Mike Timpson, Edward evasion), and Penrose, John Tolhurst, Kelly (c) the appropriate authority exercising the function considers Percy, Andrew Tomlinson, Justin that the exercise is necessary in consequence of the Philp, Chris Tomlinson, Michael Northern Ireland Protocol. Pincher, rh Christopher Trevelyan, rh Anne-Marie Poulter, Dr Dan Trott, Laura (3B) For the purposes of this section the exercise of a function “is necessary for the purpose of dealing with a threat to Pow, Rebecca Tugendhat, Tom biosecurity in Great Britain” if the exercise of the function Prentis, Victoria Vara, Mr Shailesh consists of— Pursglove, Tom Vickers, Martin Quin, Jeremy Vickers, Matt (a) the making, or operation, of legislation which satisfies Quince, Will Villiers, rh Theresa the conditions set out in paragraph 1 of Schedule 1, Randall, Tom Wakeford, Christian or Redwood, rh John Walker, Mr Robin (b) any other activity which satisfies the conditions set out Rees-Mogg, rh Mr Jacob Wallace, rh Mr Ben in paragraph 1(2) (3), (4) and (6) of Schedule 1 Richards, Nicola Warburton, David (reading any reference in those conditions to “legislation” Richardson, Angela Warman, Matt as a reference to the activity in question). Roberts, Rob Watling, Giles (3C) In determining for the purposes of subsection (3B)(b) Robertson, Mr Laurence Webb, Suzanne whether the condition in paragraph 1(3) of Schedule 1 is met, a Robinson, Mary Whately, Helen pest or disease is to be taken to be present in Northern Ireland if Rosindell, Andrew Wheeler, Mrs Heather it is, or may be, present in qualifying Northern Ireland goods Ross, Douglas Whittaker, Craig (including when the goods are in Great Britain).’. Rowley, Lee Whittingdale, rh Mr John This amendment contains interpretation provision relating to the Russell, Dean Wiggin, Bill new exceptions introduced by Amendment 61. The exception for Rutley, David Wild, James threats to biosecurity applies in the same circumstances as the Sambrook, Gary Williams, Craig exclusion from the market access principles that is set out in Saxby, Selaine Williamson, rh Gavin paragraph 1 of Schedule 1. Scully, Paul Wilson, Munira Amendment 63, page 33, line 16, at end insert— Seely, Bob Wood, Mike ‘“excise duty” means any excise duty under— Selous, Andrew Wragg, Mr William Shapps, rh Grant (a) the Alcoholic Liquor Duties Act 1979, Wright, rh Jeremy Sharma, rh Alok Young, Jacob (b) the Hydrocarbon Oil Duties Act 1979, or Shelbrooke, rh Alec Zahawi, Nadhim (c) the Tobacco Products Duty Act 1979;’.— Simmonds, David (Mr Walker.) Skidmore, rh Chris Tellers for the Noes: Smith, Chloe Maggie Throup and This amendment contains interpretation provision relating to the Smith, Greg Leo Docherty new exceptions introduced by Amendment 61. Clause 41, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Question accordingly negatived. The list of Members currently certified as eligible for a Clause 42 proxy vote, and of the Members nominated as their proxy, is published at the end of today’s debates. Clause 40 ordered to stand part of the Bill. POWER TO DISAPPLY OR MODIFY EXPORT DECLARATIONS AND OTHER EXIT PROCEDURES Clause 41 Amendment proposed: 54, page 33, line 40, at end insert “, and UNFETTERED ACCESS TO UK INTERNAL MARKET FOR (c) the need to respect the rule of law.”—(Paul Blomfield.) NORTHERN IRELAND GOODS This amendment would require Ministers to take into account the Amendments made: 61, page 32, line 13, at end rule of law when making regulations about exit procedures for insert— goods moving from Northern Ireland to Great Britain. “(d) is necessary for the purposes of VAT or excise duty in Question put, That the amendment be made. consequence of the Northern Ireland Protocol, or Question negatived. 755 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 756

Question put (single Question on successive provisions Grayling, rh Chris Lopresti, Jack of the Bill), That clauses 42 to 44 stand part of the Bill. Green, Chris Lord, Mr Jonathan Green, rh Damian Loughton, Tim The Committee divided: Ayes 332, Noes 257. Griffith, Andrew Mackinlay, Craig Division No. 102] [11.16 pm Griffiths, Kate Mackrory, Cherilyn Grundy, James Maclean, Rachel AYES Gullis, Jonathan Mak, Alan Halfon, rh Robert Malthouse, Kit Adams, Nigel Clifton-Brown, Sir Geoffrey Hall, Luke Mangnall, Anthony Afolami, Bim Coffey, rh Dr Thérèse Hammond, Stephen Mann, Scott Ahmad Khan, Imran Colburn, Elliot Hands, rh Greg Marson, Julie Aiken, Nickie Collins, Damian Harper, rh Mr Mark Mayhew, Jerome Aldous, Peter Costa, Alberto Harris, Rebecca Maynard, Paul Allan, Lucy Courts, Robert Harrison, Trudy McCartney, Jason Amess, Sir David Coutinho, Claire Hart, Sally-Ann McCartney, Karl Anderson, Lee Crabb, rh Stephen Hart, rh Simon McPartland, Stephen Anderson, Stuart Crosbie, Virginia Heald, rh Sir Oliver Menzies, Mark Andrew, Stuart Crouch, Tracey Heappey, James Mercer, Johnny Ansell, Caroline Daly, James Heaton-Harris, Chris Merriman, Huw Argar, Edward Davies, David T. C. Henderson, Gordon Metcalfe, Stephen Atherton, Sarah Davies, Gareth Henry, Darren Millar, Robin Atkins, Victoria Davies, Dr James Higginbotham, Antony Milling, rh Amanda Bacon, Gareth Davies, Mims Hinds, rh Damian Mills, Nigel Bacon, Mr Richard Davis, rh Mr David Holden, Mr Richard Mitchell, rh Mr Andrew Badenoch, Kemi Davison, Dehenna Hollinrake, Kevin Mohindra, Mr Gagan Bailey, Shaun Dinenage, Caroline Hollobone, Mr Philip Moore, Damien Baillie, Siobhan Dines, Miss Sarah Holloway, Adam Moore, Robbie Baker, Duncan Djanogly, Mr Jonathan Holmes, Paul Mordaunt, rh Penny Baker, Mr Steve Docherty, Leo Howell, John Morris, Anne Marie Baldwin, Harriett Donaldson, rh Sir Jeffrey M. Howell, Paul Morris, David Barclay, rh Steve Donelan, Michelle Huddleston, Nigel Morris, James Baron, Mr John Double, Steve Hudson, Dr Neil Morrissey, Joy Baynes, Simon Doyle-Price, Jackie Hughes, Eddie Morton, Wendy Bell, Aaron Drax, Richard Hunt, Jane Mullan, Dr Kieran Benton, Scott Drummond, Mrs Flick Hunt, rh Jeremy Mumby-Croft, Holly Beresford, Sir Paul Duddridge, James Hunt, Tom Mundell, rh David Berry, rh Jake Duguid, David Jack, rh Mr Alister Murray, Mrs Sheryll Bhatti, Saqib Duncan Smith, rh Sir Iain Javid, rh Sajid Murrison, rh Dr Andrew Blackman, Bob Dunne, rh Philip Jayawardena, Mr Ranil Neill, Sir Robert Bone, Mr Peter Eastwood, Mark Jenkin, Sir Bernard Nici, Lia Bottomley, Sir Peter Edwards, Ruth Jenkyns, Andrea Norman, rh Jesse Bowie, Andrew Ellis, rh Michael Jenrick, rh Robert O’Brien, Neil Bradley, Ben Ellwood, rh Mr Tobias Johnson, Dr Caroline Offord, Dr Matthew Brereton, Jack Elphicke, Mrs Natalie Johnson, Gareth Opperman, Guy Bridgen, Andrew Eustice, rh George Johnston, David Paisley, Ian Brine, Steve Evans, Dr Luke Jones, Andrew Parish, Neil Bristow, Paul Evennett, rh Sir David Jones, rh Mr David Paterson, rh Mr Owen Britcliffe, Sara Everitt, Ben Jones, Fay Pawsey, Mark Brokenshire, rh James Fabricant, Michael Jones, Mr Marcus Penning, rh Sir Mike Browne, Anthony Farris, Laura Jupp, Simon Penrose, John Bruce, Fiona Fell, Simon Kawczynski, Daniel Percy, Andrew Buchan, Felicity Fletcher, Katherine Kearns, Alicia Philp, Chris Buckland, rh Robert Fletcher, Mark Keegan, Gillian Pincher, rh Christopher Burghart, Alex Fletcher, Nick Knight, rh Sir Greg Poulter, Dr Dan Burns, rh Conor Ford, Vicky Knight, Julian Pow, Rebecca Butler, Rob Foster, Kevin Kruger, Danny Prentis, Victoria Cairns, rh Alun Francois, rh Mr Mark Kwarteng, rh Kwasi Quin, Jeremy Campbell, Mr Gregory Frazer, Lucy Lamont, John Quince, Will Carter, Andy Freeman, George Largan, Robert Randall, Tom Cartlidge, James Freer, Mike Latham, Mrs Pauline Redwood, rh John Cash, Sir William Fuller, Richard Leadsom, rh Andrea Rees-Mogg, rh Mr Jacob Cates, Miriam Fysh, Mr Marcus Leigh, rh Sir Edward Richards, Nicola Caulfield, Maria Garnier, Mark Levy, Ian Richardson, Angela Chalk, Alex Ghani, Ms Nusrat Lewer, Andrew Roberts, Rob Chishti, Rehman Gibb, rh Nick Chope, Sir Christopher Gibson, Peter Lewis, rh Brandon Robertson, Mr Laurence Churchill, Jo Gideon, Jo Lewis, rh Dr Julian Robinson, Gavin Clark, rh Greg Gillan, rh Dame Cheryl Liddell-Grainger, Mr Ian Robinson, Mary Clarke, Mr Simon Glen, John Lockhart, Carla Rosindell, Andrew Clarke, Theo Goodwill, rh Mr Robert Loder, Chris Ross, Douglas Clarke-Smith, Brendan Graham, Richard Logan, Mark Rowley, Lee Clarkson, Chris Grant, Mrs Helen Longhi, Marco Russell, Dean Cleverly, rh James Gray, James Lopez, Julia Sambrook, Gary 757 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 758

Saxby, Selaine Tomlinson, Justin Edwards, Jonathan Lucas, Caroline Scully, Paul Tomlinson, Michael Efford, Clive Lynch, Holly Seely, Bob Trevelyan, rh Anne-Marie Elliott, Julie MacAskill, Kenny Selous, Andrew Trott, Laura Elmore, Chris MacNeil, Angus Brendan Sharma, rh Alok Vara, Mr Shailesh Eshalomi, Florence Madders, Justin Shelbrooke, rh Alec Vickers, Martin Esterson, Bill Mahmood, Mr Khalid Simmonds, David Vickers, Matt Evans, Chris Mahmood, Shabana Skidmore, rh Chris Villiers, rh Theresa Farron, Tim Malhotra, Seema Smith, Chloe Wakeford, Christian Farry, Stephen Maskell, Rachael Smith, Greg Walker, Mr Robin Fellows, Marion Matheson, Christian Smith, Henry Wallace, rh Mr Ben Ferrier, Margaret Mc Nally, John Smith, Royston Wallis, Dr Jamie Fletcher, Colleen McCabe, Steve Solloway, Amanda Warburton, David Flynn, Stephen McCarthy, Kerry Spencer, Dr Ben Warman, Matt Foxcroft, Vicky McDonald, Andy Spencer, rh Mark Watling, Giles Foy, Mary Kelly McDonald, Stewart Malcolm Stafford, Alexander Webb, Suzanne Furniss, Gill McDonald, Stuart C. Stephenson, Andrew Whately, Helen Gardiner, Barry McDonnell, rh John Stevenson, Jane Wheeler, Mrs Heather Gibson, Patricia McFadden, rh Mr Pat Stevenson, John Whittaker, Craig Gill, Preet Kaur McGinn, Conor Stewart, Bob Whittingdale, rh Mr John Girvan, Paul McGovern, Alison Stewart, Iain Wild, James Glindon, Mary McKinnell, Catherine Stride, rh Mel Williams, Craig Grady, Patrick McLaughlin, Anne Stuart, Graham Williamson, rh Gavin Grant, Peter McMahon, Jim Sturdy, Julian Wilson, rh Sammy Gray, Neil McMorrin, Anna Sunderland, James Wood, Mike Green, Kate Mearns, Ian Swayne, rh Sir Desmond Greenwood, Lilian Miliband, rh Edward Young, Jacob Syms, Sir Robert Greenwood, Margaret Mishra, Navendu Zahawi, Nadhim Thomas, Derek Griffith, Nia Monaghan, Carol Throup, Maggie Tellers for the Ayes: Gwynne, Andrew Moran, Layla Timpson, Edward Tom Pursglove and Haigh, Louise Morden, Jessica Tolhurst, Kelly David Rutley Hamilton, Fabian Morgan, Stephen Hanna, Claire Morris, Grahame NOES Hanvey, Neale Murray, Ian Hardy, Emma Murray, James Abbott, rh Ms Diane Carmichael, rh Mr Alistair Harman, rh Ms Harriet Nandy, Lisa Ali, Rushanara Chamberlain, Wendy Harris, Carolyn Newlands, Gavin Ali, Tahir Champion, Sarah Hayes, Helen Nichols, Charlotte Allin-Khan, Dr Rosena Chapman, Douglas Healey, rh John Nicolson, John Amesbury, Mike Cherry, Joanna Hendrick, Sir Mark Norris, Alex Anderson, Fleur Clark, Feryal Hendry, Drew O’Hara, Brendan Antoniazzi, Tonia Cooper, Daisy Hill, Mike Olney, Sarah Ashworth, Jonathan Cooper, Rosie Hillier, Meg Onwurah, Chi Bardell, Hannah Cooper, rh Yvette Hobhouse, Wera Oppong-Asare, Abena Barker, Paula Corbyn, rh Jeremy Hodge, rh Dame Margaret Osamor, Kate Beckett, rh Margaret Cowan, Ronnie Hodgson, Mrs Sharon Osborne, Kate Begum, Apsana Coyle, Neil Hopkins, Rachel Oswald, Kirsten Benn, rh Hilary Crawley, Angela Hosie, Stewart Owatemi, Taiwo Betts, Mr Clive Creasy, Stella Howarth, rh Sir George Owen, Sarah Black, Mhairi Cruddas, Jon Huq, Dr Rupa Peacock, Stephanie Blackford, rh Ian Cryer, John Hussain, Imran Pennycook, Matthew Blackman, Kirsty Cummins, Judith Jardine, Christine Perkins, Mr Toby Blake, Olivia Cunningham, Alex Johnson, Dame Diana Phillips, Jess Blomfield, Paul Daby, Janet Johnson, Kim Phillipson, Bridget Bonnar, Steven Davey, rh Sir Edward Jones, Darren Pollard, Luke Brabin, Tracy David, Wayne Jones, Gerald Powell, Lucy Bradshaw, rh Mr Ben Davies, Geraint Jones, rh Mr Kevan Qureshi, Yasmin Brennan, Kevin Davies-Jones, Alex Jones, Ruth Rayner, Angela Brock, Deidre Day, Martyn Jones, Sarah Reed, Steve Brown, Alan De Cordova, Marsha Kane, Mike Rees, Christina Brown, Ms Lyn Debbonaire, Thangam Keeley, Barbara Reeves, Ellie Brown, rh Mr Nicholas Dhesi, Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Kendall, Liz Reynolds, Jonathan Bryant, Chris Docherty-Hughes, Martin Khan, Afzal Ribeiro-Addy, Bell Buck, Ms Karen Dodds, Anneliese Kinnock, Stephen Rimmer, Ms Marie Burgon, Richard Doogan, Dave Kyle, Peter Rodda, Matt Butler, Dawn Dorans, Allan Lake, Ben Russell-Moyle, Lloyd Byrne, Ian Doughty, Stephen Lammy, rh Mr David Saville Roberts, rh Liz Byrne, rh Liam Dowd, Peter Lavery, Ian Shannon, Jim Cadbury, Ruth Dromey, Jack Law, Chris Sharma, Mr Virendra Callaghan, Amy Duffield, Rosie Lewis, Clive Sheerman, Mr Barry Cameron, Dr Lisa Eagle, Ms Angela Linden, David Sheppard, Tommy Campbell, rh Sir Alan Eagle, Maria Lloyd, Tony Siddiq, Tulip Carden, Dan Eastwood, Colum Long Bailey, Rebecca Slaughter, Andy 759 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 760

Smith, Alyn Trickett, Jon The Committee divided: Ayes 338, Noes 254. Smith, Cat Turner, Karl Division No. 103] [11.30 pm Smith, Nick Twigg, Derek Smyth, Karin Twist, Liz Sobel, Alex Vaz, rh Valerie AYES Spellar, rh John Webbe, Claudia Adams, Nigel Clifton-Brown, Sir Geoffrey Stephens, Chris Western, Matt Afolami, Bim Coffey, rh Dr Thérèse Stevens, Jo Whitehead, Dr Alan Afriyie, Adam Colburn, Elliot Stone, Jamie Whitford, Dr Philippa Ahmad Khan, Imran Collins, Damian Streeting, Wes Whitley, Mick Aiken, Nickie Costa, Alberto Sultana, Zarah Whittome, Nadia Aldous, Peter Courts, Robert Tami, rh Mark Williams, Hywel Allan, Lucy Coutinho, Claire Tarry, Sam Wilson, Munira Amess, Sir David Crabb, rh Stephen Thewliss, Alison Winter, Beth Anderson, Lee Crosbie, Virginia Thomas, Gareth Wishart, Pete Anderson, Stuart Crouch, Tracey Thomas-Symonds, Nick Yasin, Mohammad Andrew, Stuart Daly, James Thompson, Owen Zeichner, Daniel Ansell, Caroline Davies, David T. C. Thomson, Richard Tellers for the Noes: Argar, Edward Davies, Gareth Atherton, Sarah Davies, Dr James Thornberry, rh Emily Bambos Charalambous and Atkins, Victoria Davies, Mims Timms, rh Stephen Jeff Smith Bacon, Gareth Davis, rh Mr David Bacon, Mr Richard Davison, Dehenna Question accordingly agreed to. Badenoch, Kemi Dinenage, Caroline Clauses 42 to 44 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bailey, Shaun Dines, Miss Sarah Baillie, Siobhan Djanogly, Mr Jonathan The list of Members currently certified as eligible for a Baker, Duncan Docherty, Leo proxy vote, and of the Members nominated as their Baker, Mr Steve Donaldson, rh Sir Jeffrey M. proxy, is published at the end of today’s debates. Baldwin, Harriett Donelan, Michelle Barclay, rh Steve Double, Steve Baron, Mr John Doyle-Price, Jackie Clause 45 Baynes, Simon Drax, Richard Bell, Aaron Drummond, Mrs Flick FURTHER PROVISION RELATED TO SECTIONS 42 AND 43 Benton, Scott Duddridge, James ETC Beresford, Sir Paul Duguid, David Amendments made: 64, page 36, line 11, at end Berry, rh Jake Duncan Smith, rh Sir Iain insert— Bhatti, Saqib Dunne, rh Philip Blackman, Bob Eastwood, Mark ‘(2A) The period mentioned in each of the following Bone, Mr Peter Edwards, Ruth provisions (standard time limits for seeking judicial review), or Bottomley, Sir Peter Ellis, rh Michael any corresponding successor provision, may not be extended Bowie, Andrew Ellwood, rh Mr Tobias under any circumstances in relation to a relevant claim or Bradley, Ben Elphicke, Mrs Natalie application— Braverman, rh Suella Eustice, rh George (a) rule 54.5(1)(b) of the Civil Procedure Rules in relation Brereton, Jack Evans, Dr Luke to England and Wales; Bridgen, Andrew Evennett, rh Sir David (b) section 27A(1)(a) of the Court of Session Act 1988 in Brine, Steve Everitt, Ben relation to Scotland; Bristow, Paul Fabricant, Michael (c) rule 4(1) of Order 53 of the Rules of the Court of Britcliffe, Sara Farris, Laura Judicature (Northern Ireland) 1980 (S.R. (N.I.) 1980 Brokenshire, rh James Fell, Simon No. 346) in relation to Northern Ireland. Browne, Anthony Fletcher, Katherine (2B) The jurisdiction and powers of a court or tribunal in Bruce, Fiona Fletcher, Mark relation to a relevant claim or application are subject to Buchan, Felicity Fletcher, Nick subsections (1) and (2).” Buckland, rh Robert Ford, Vicky This amendment and Amendment 65 would provide that the Burghart, Alex Foster, Kevin standard time limit for an application for judicial review of Burns, rh Conor Francois, rh Mr Mark regulations under clause 42 or 43 could not be extended. Butler, Rob Frazer, Lucy 65, page 36, line 18, at end insert— Cairns, rh Alun Freeman, George Campbell, Mr Gregory Freer, Mike ““relevant claim or application” means— Carter, Andy Fuller, Richard (a) a claim for judicial review in relation to Cartlidge, James Fysh, Mr Marcus England and Wales, Cash, Sir William Garnier, Mark (b) an application to the supervisory jurisdiction of Cates, Miriam Ghani, Ms Nusrat the Court of Session in relation to Scotland, Caulfield, Maria Gibb, rh Nick or Chalk, Alex Gibson, Peter (c) an application for judicial review in relation to Chishti, Rehman Gideon, Jo Northern Ireland, Chope, Sir Christopher Gillan, rh Dame Cheryl where the claim or application is for the purpose of Churchill, Jo Girvan, Paul questioning the validity or lawfulness of Clark, rh Greg Glen, John regulations under section 42(1) or 43(1);” Clarke, Mr Simon Goodwill, rh Mr Robert —(Mr Robin Walker.) Clarke, Theo Graham, Richard See the explanatory statement for Amendment 64. Clarke-Smith, Brendan Grant, Mrs Helen Question put, That clause 45, as amended, and Clarkson, Chris Gray, James clause 50 stand part of the Bill. Cleverly, rh James Grayling, rh Chris 761 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill21 SEPTEMBER 2020 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 762

Green, Chris Lopresti, Jack Saxby, Selaine Tomlinson, Justin Green, rh Damian Lord, Mr Jonathan Scully, Paul Tomlinson, Michael Griffith, Andrew Loughton, Tim Seely, Bob Trevelyan, rh Anne-Marie Griffiths, Kate Mackinlay, Craig Selous, Andrew Trott, Laura Grundy, James Mackrory, Cherilyn Shannon, Jim Vara, Mr Shailesh Gullis, Jonathan Maclean, Rachel Sharma, rh Alok Vickers, Martin Halfon, rh Robert Mak, Alan Shelbrooke, rh Alec Vickers, Matt Hall, Luke Malthouse, Kit Simmonds, David Villiers, rh Theresa Hammond, Stephen Mangnall, Anthony Skidmore, rh Chris Wakeford, Christian Hands, rh Greg Mann, Scott Smith, Chloe Walker, Mr Robin Harper, rh Mr Mark Marson, Julie Smith, Greg Wallace, rh Mr Ben Harris, Rebecca Mayhew, Jerome Smith, Henry Wallis, Dr Jamie Harrison, Trudy Maynard, Paul Smith, Royston Warburton, David Hart, Sally-Ann McCartney, Jason Solloway, Amanda Warman, Matt Hart, rh Simon McCartney, Karl Spencer, Dr Ben Watling, Giles Hayes, rh Sir John McPartland, Stephen Spencer, rh Mark Webb, Suzanne Heald, rh Sir Oliver Menzies, Mark Stafford, Alexander Whately, Helen Heappey, James Mercer, Johnny Stephenson, Andrew Wheeler, Mrs Heather Heaton-Harris, Chris Merriman, Huw Stevenson, Jane Whittaker, Craig Henderson, Gordon Metcalfe, Stephen Stevenson, , rh Mr John Henry, Darren Millar, Robin Stewart, Bob Wiggin, Bill Higginbotham, Antony Milling, rh Amanda Stewart, Iain Wild, James Hinds, rh Damian Mills, Nigel Stride, rh Mel Williams, Craig Holden, Mr Richard Mitchell, rh Mr Andrew Stuart, Graham Williamson, rh Gavin Hollinrake, Kevin Mohindra, Mr Gagan Sturdy, Julian Wilson, rh Sammy Hollobone, Mr Philip Moore, Damien Sunderland, James Wood, Mike Holloway, Adam Moore, Robbie Swayne, rh Sir Desmond Young, Jacob Holmes, Paul Mordaunt, rh Penny Syms, Sir Robert Zahawi, Nadhim Howell, John Morris, Anne Marie Thomas, Derek Howell, Paul Morris, David Throup, Maggie Tellers for the Ayes: Huddleston, Nigel Morris, James Timpson, Edward Tom Pursglove and Hudson, Dr Neil Morrissey, Joy Tolhurst, Kelly David Rutley Hughes, Eddie Morton, Wendy Hunt, Jane Mullan, Dr Kieran NOES Hunt, rh Jeremy Mumby-Croft, Holly Hunt, Tom Mundell, rh David Abbott, rh Ms Diane Carden, Dan Jack, rh Mr Alister Murray, Mrs Sheryll Ali, Rushanara Carmichael, rh Mr Alistair Javid, rh Sajid Murrison, rh Dr Andrew Ali, Tahir Chamberlain, Wendy Jayawardena, Mr Ranil Neill, Sir Robert Allin-Khan, Dr Rosena Champion, Sarah Jenkin, Sir Bernard Nici, Lia Amesbury, Mike Chapman, Douglas Jenkyns, Andrea Norman, rh Jesse Anderson, Fleur Cherry, Joanna Jenrick, rh Robert O’Brien, Neil Antoniazzi, Tonia Clark, Feryal Johnson, Dr Caroline Offord, Dr Matthew Ashworth, Jonathan Cooper, Daisy Johnson, Gareth Opperman, Guy Bardell, Hannah Cooper, Rosie Johnston, David Paisley, Ian Barker, Paula Cooper, rh Yvette Jones, Andrew Parish, Neil Beckett, rh Margaret Corbyn, rh Jeremy Jones, rh Mr David Paterson, rh Mr Owen Begum, Apsana Cowan, Ronnie Jones, Fay Pawsey, Mark Benn, rh Hilary Coyle, Neil Jones, Mr Marcus Penning, rh Sir Mike Betts, Mr Clive Crawley, Angela Jupp, Simon Penrose, John Black, Mhairi Creasy, Stella Kawczynski, Daniel Percy, Andrew Blackford, rh Ian Cruddas, Jon Kearns, Alicia Philp, Chris Blackman, Kirsty Cryer, John Keegan, Gillian Pincher, rh Christopher Blake, Olivia Cummins, Judith Knight, rh Sir Greg Poulter, Dr Dan Blomfield, Paul Cunningham, Alex Knight, Julian Pow, Rebecca Bonnar, Steven Daby, Janet Kruger, Danny Prentis, Victoria Brabin, Tracy Davey, rh Sir Edward Kwarteng, rh Kwasi Quin, Jeremy Bradshaw, rh Mr Ben David, Wayne Lamont, John Quince, Will Brennan, Kevin Davies, Geraint Largan, Robert Randall, Tom Brock, Deidre Davies-Jones, Alex Latham, Mrs Pauline Redwood, rh John Brown, Alan Day, Martyn Leadsom, rh Andrea Rees-Mogg, rh Mr Jacob Brown, Ms Lyn De Cordova, Marsha Leigh, rh Sir Edward Richards, Nicola Brown, rh Mr Nicholas Debbonaire, Thangam Levy, Ian Richardson, Angela Bryant, Chris Dhesi, Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Lewer, Andrew Roberts, Rob Buck, Ms Karen Docherty-Hughes, Martin Lewis, rh Brandon Robertson, Mr Laurence Burgon, Richard Dodds, Anneliese Lewis, rh Dr Julian Robinson, Gavin Butler, Dawn Doogan, Dave Liddell-Grainger, Mr Ian Robinson, Mary Byrne, Ian Dorans, Allan Lockhart, Carla Rosindell, Andrew Byrne, rh Liam Doughty, Stephen Loder, Chris Ross, Douglas Cadbury, Ruth Dowd, Peter Logan, Mark Rowley, Lee Callaghan, Amy Dromey, Jack Longhi, Marco Russell, Dean Cameron, Dr Lisa Duffield, Rosie Lopez, Julia Sambrook, Gary Campbell, rh Sir Alan Eagle, Ms Angela 763 United Kingdom Internal Market Bill 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 764

Eagle, Maria Long Bailey, Rebecca Smith, Alyn Trickett, Jon Eastwood, Colum Lucas, Caroline Smith, Cat Turner, Karl Edwards, Jonathan Lynch, Holly Smith, Nick Twigg, Derek Efford, Clive MacAskill, Kenny Smyth, Karin Twist, Liz Elliott, Julie MacNeil, Angus Brendan Sobel, Alex Vaz, rh Valerie Elmore, Chris Madders, Justin Spellar, rh John Webbe, Claudia Eshalomi, Florence Mahmood, Mr Khalid Stephens, Chris Western, Matt Esterson, Bill Mahmood, Shabana Stevens, Jo Whitehead, Dr Alan Evans, Chris Malhotra, Seema Stone, Jamie Whitford, Dr Philippa Farron, Tim Maskell, Rachael Streeting, Wes Whitley, Mick Farry, Stephen Matheson, Christian Sultana, Zarah Whittome, Nadia Fellows, Marion Mc Nally, John Tami, rh Mark Williams, Hywel Ferrier, Margaret McCabe, Steve Tarry, Sam Wilson, Munira Fletcher, Colleen McCarthy, Kerry Thewliss, Alison Winter, Beth Flynn, Stephen McDonald, Andy Thomas, Gareth Wishart, Pete Foxcroft, Vicky McDonald, Stewart Malcolm Thomas-Symonds, Nick Yasin, Mohammad Foy, Mary Kelly McDonald, Stuart C. Thompson, Owen Zeichner, Daniel Furniss, Gill McDonnell, rh John Thomson, Richard Tellers for the Noes: Gardiner, Barry McFadden, rh Mr Pat Thornberry, rh Emily Bambos Charalambous and Gibson, Patricia McGinn, Conor Timms, rh Stephen Jeff Smith Gill, Preet Kaur McGovern, Alison Glindon, Mary McKinnell, Catherine Grady, Patrick McLaughlin, Anne Question accordingly agreed to. Grant, Peter McMahon, Jim The list of Members currently certified as eligible for Gray, Neil McMorrin, Anna a proxy vote, and of the Members nominated as their Green, Kate Mearns, Ian proxy, is published at the end of today’s debates. Greenwood, Lilian Miliband, rh Edward Clause 45, as amended, and clause 50 ordered to stand Greenwood, Margaret Mishra, Navendu part of the Bill. Griffith, Nia Monaghan, Carol Gwynne, Andrew Moran, Layla The occupant of the Chair left the Chair (Programme Haigh, Louise Morden, Jessica Order, 14 September). Hamilton, Fabian Morgan, Stephen The Deputy Speaker resumed the Chair. Hanna, Claire Morris, Grahame Progress reported; Committee to sit again tomorrow. Hanvey, Neale Murray, Ian Hardy, Emma Murray, James Business without Debate Harman, rh Ms Harriet Nandy, Lisa Harris, Carolyn Newlands, Gavin DELEGATED LEGISLATION Hayes, Helen Nichols, Charlotte Healey, rh John Nicolson, John Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame ): With Hendrick, Sir Mark Norris, Alex the leave of the House, we shall take motions 2 to 6 Hendry, Drew O’Hara, Brendan together. Hill, Mike Olney, Sarah Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing Hillier, Meg Onwurah, Chi Order No. 118(6)), Hobhouse, Wera Oppong-Asare, Abena Hodge, rh Dame Margaret Osamor, Kate EXITING THE EUROPEAN UNION Hodgson, Mrs Sharon Osborne, Kate That the draft European Structural and Investment Funds Hopkins, Rachel Oswald, Kirsten Common Provisions and Common Provision Rules etc. (Amendment) Hosie, Stewart Owatemi, Taiwo (EU Exit) (Revocation) Regulations 2020, which were laid before Howarth, rh Sir George Owen, Sarah this House on 13 July, be approved. Huq, Dr Rupa Peacock, Stephanie INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING Hussain, Imran Pennycook, Matthew Jardine, Christine Perkins, Mr Toby That the draft Infrastructure Planning (Electricity Storage Facilities) Order 2020, which was laid before this House on Johnson, Dame Diana Phillips, Jess 14 July, be approved. Johnson, Kim Phillipson, Bridget Jones, Darren Pollard, Luke REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE Jones, Gerald Powell, Lucy That the draft Representation of the People (Electoral Registers Jones, rh Mr Kevan Qureshi, Yasmin Publication Date) Regulations 2020, which were laid before this Jones, Ruth Rayner, Angela House on 15 June, be approved. Jones, Sarah Reed, Steve Kane, Mike Rees, Christina ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Keeley, Barbara Reeves, Ellie That the draft Air Quality (Domestic Solid Fuels Standards) Kendall, Liz Reynolds, Jonathan (England) Regulations 2020, which were laid before this House Khan, Afzal Ribeiro-Addy, Bell on 21 July, be approved. Kinnock, Stephen Rimmer, Ms Marie EXITING THE EUROPEAN UNION (FINANCIAL SERVICES Kyle, Peter Rodda, Matt AND MARKETS) Lake, Ben Russell-Moyle, Lloyd That the draft Equivalence Determinations for Financial Services Lammy, rh Mr David Saville Roberts, rh Liz (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020, which were laid Lavery, Ian Sharma, Mr Virendra before this House on 25 June, be approved.—(David T. C. Davies.) Law, Chris Sheerman, Mr Barry Question agreed to. Lewis, Clive Sheppard, Tommy Linden, David Siddiq, Tulip Madam Deputy Speaker: With the leave of the House, Lloyd, Tony Slaughter, Andy we will take motions 7 to 10 together. 765 Business without Debate 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 766

[Madam Deputy Speaker] ARM: Foreign Acquisition That this House Ordered, Motion made, and Question proposed, do now adjourn.—(David T. C. Davies.)

BUSINESS,ENERGY AND INDUSTRIAL STRATEGY COMMITTEE 11.48 pm That Ruth Jones be discharged from the Business, Energy and Daniel Zeichner (Cambridge) (Lab): Earlier this evening, Industrial Strategy Committee and be added. BBC Look East reported that this was a debate worth waiting up for, so we surely must not disappoint. I am EDUCATION COMMITTEE very grateful for the opportunity to raise an issue vital That be discharged from the Education Committee to my constituency, but also important for the future of and Fleur Anderson be added. the wider UK economy. I declare at the outset that I am a member of Unite the union, and I am very grateful to PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE it for giving me the opportunity to hear directly from That be discharged from the Public Accounts members employed at the company. Committee and be added. This urgently needed debate is to secure answers PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND CONSTITUTIONAL on the future of one of the UK’s most successful tech AFFAIRS COMMITTEE companies, ARM, which is based in my constituency. It was confirmed last Monday that it was being sold to the That Chris Evans be discharged from the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee and Navendu Mishra be American tech firm Nvidia. Since it was founded in added.—(Bill Wiggin, on behalf of the Committee of Selection.) 1990 in Cambridge, ARM has become one of the UK’s best home-grown technology success stories, with huge global reach. It now designs and licenses the basic blueprints of chips used in around 90% of the world’s smartphones, as well as countless sensors, smart devices and cloud devices. Hundreds of global companies license its designs, including Apple, Samsung, Huawei and Qualcomm, putting the UK firmly at the centre of global technological development. ARM employs around 2,700 people in the UK, many in highly skilled, high-tech jobs. They work in its headquarters in Cambridge and across the country in Belfast, Manchester and Warwick.

Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP): First, I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on securing this Adjournment debate. I share his concern, as I have a number of high-tech and modern manufacturing companies in my constituency. Does he agree that the proposed sale will be against the national interest and the UK’s ambitions to be a European technological powerhouse? It is important for us in the UK to look after our own.

Daniel Zeichner: The hon. Gentleman anticipates my arguments, because there can be little doubt that this home-grown tech star is a great national asset for the country. Back in 2016, alongside many in Cambridge and across the UK tech sector, I was hugely disappointed to see ARM sold to the Japanese conglomerate SoftBank. I warned then that we were losing control of this important national asset, and I fear we are now seeing that warning borne out. ARM’s sell-off in 2016 was backed by this Government with conditions that its headquarters would stay in Cambridge and its staff would be maintained, and so far that guarantee has been honoured, but we are now faced with a new situation with the news of the sale last Monday. Back in 2016, the then Chancellor, Philip Hammond, considered it so significant that he announced the deal personally and legally binding guarantees enforceable by the Takeover Panel were secured. This time there has been silence from Government—a silence that I hope will be broken this evening. Although I recognise the sensitivities around commercial confidentiality, the same applied back in 2016. We need to know what the Government’s view is on the transfer of a key UK- based technology giant, particularly in such uncertain times. 767 ARM: Foreign Acquisition21 SEPTEMBER 2020 ARM: Foreign Acquisition 768

Darren Jones ( North West) (Lab): I thank my but will they be kept? How will they be enforced? The hon. Friend for securing this important debate. Does he deal will affect jobs not just now but in the future, and agree with me that in assessing the risks of the takeover could have serious ramifications. bid, we need to understand the possible repercussions ARM’scurrent business model has been highly successful. for British jobs and industry if trade sanctions are put It is based on remaining neutral in the tech market and in place by President Trump, for example, as the Nvidia licensing chip designs to any chip maker that wants parent company is based in the United States? them. ARM’s co-founder Hermann Hauser has warned that although SoftBank was able to maintain ARM’s neutrality, Nvidia is different: it is a chip maker itself, so Daniel Zeichner: I thank my hon. Friend the Chair of companies using ARM will now find themselves as the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Committee. competitors with its parent company. Some could start He makes an important point that I will come on to, but to seek alternatives. Nvidia has said that it will maintain I return to the Government’s position, because I find ARM’s neutrality, but we have no legal assurances. Will their silence slightly ominous. It has only been breached the Government be seeking assurances that ARM’s by briefings to selected journalists and, frankly, that unique business model—and so its success—will be does not seem good enough to me. secured? It would be astonishing if this Government, with all The sale has implications both internationally and their talk of world-beating test systems and taking back diplomatically. If ARM becomes a subsidiary of the control, considered allowing us to lose further control American company Nvidia, we will in effect be handing of one of the only areas of technology in which we are over control to the current US Government, as it could genuinely world-beating and world-leading. It is particularly become subject to their foreign investment regulatory astonishing that the Government might be prepared to committee, the Committee on Foreign Investment in throw away British influence when it represents such a the United States. The Trump Administration will then key bargaining chip in trade talks in a post-Brexit era. I ultimately hold the reins over which countries use the do not think any other country in the world would technology—which is used in almost all mobile phone allow such a jewel in the tech crown to be handed over chips in the world—and where it will be possible to in this way, so I urge the Government to scrutinise the export it. deal carefully and to step in and use powers available to It is quite clear that Trump has no qualms about them to impose strict, legally binding conditions. interfering in the operations of tech companies to pursue The sale raises a range of questions and issues of his own foreign policy goals. Chinese tech companies local, national and international significance. I have have already voiced concerns that American ownership been raising them for many weeks now, as have trade of ARM could jeopardise access to ARM technologies unions and the co-founders of ARM. We have received for their businesses. Some may not be bothered about little substantial response from Government, although that, but it highlights the real role that this UK-located I was pleased to have a direct discussion with Nvidia tech giant plays in the international struggle for today. I invite the Minister to provide some answers technological sovereignty. from the Government’s perspective. We need guarantees that ARM is not going to be embroiled in American trade wars and that decisions Since the announcement, Nvidia has made promises over this key technology are not completely lost to us. to keep ARM based in Cambridge, to hire more staff As the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee said: and to retain ARM’s brand, but without any legal guarantees, I fear those remain just promises—doubtless “The sale of @Arm raises questions of sovereignty. Control of tech is an essential element of independence and @UKParliament genuinely made—not guarantees.Will the Minister confirm will have no say on the CFIUS decisions that go to the US whether the Government are seeking legal assurances in President alone.” this deal to ensure that ARM’s headquarters remain in I agree. To safeguard the UK’s interests, we need clear Cambridge and it retains the some 2,700 jobs it supports conditions on the takeover to exempt ARM’s tech from in my constituency and across the country? I am sure intrusive US regulations. the Minister will say that it is hardly likely that Nvidia The takeover comes more than a year after the would ditch highly sought-after engineers, but members Government’s telecoms supply chain review report, in of Unite have told me that many jobs, particularly in IT, which the Government committed to diversifying the are much more vulnerable. Similarly, I am told that UK telecommunication supply chain. Since then, a plan some 300 people in Cambridge work on graphics processors, to do just that has repeatedly been promised and repeatedly an area in which Nvidia works. It could be a perfect been delayed. Will the Minister explain just how selling match, or it could mean rationalisation and job cuts. this UK-headquartered, world-leading telecoms supplier There is little sign of much meaningful consultation to a competitor supports the diversification of the with those who work for the company. Having followed supply chain? the media commentary, it has struck me that those who I understand that the Government say they are looking work for ARM hardly seem to have a voice—a doleful into the takeover and that Ministers are considering consequence, I fear, of a largely non-unionised workforce. whether to refer it to the Competition and Markets The money may be good, but when it comes to times Authority. I also appreciate that Government policy is such as this, the value of having professional negotiators in a state of flux, with a pattern of tech businesses being acting on one’s behalf becomes apparent. I am grateful taken over, the status of the industrial strategy unclear, for the strong interventions from not only Unite but and the national security and investment Bill yet to be Prospect, which also has members at ARM. I have a published, so we have to use what we have.The Government further question: will the Minister confirm that Cambridge have the power to impose conditions on such takeovers will continue to be the company HQ and explain how if they threaten national security or financial stability, promises will be enforced? Anyone can make promises, which the selling of ARM to Nvidia clearly does. 769 ARM: Foreign Acquisition21 SEPTEMBER 2020 ARM: Foreign Acquisition 770

[Daniel Zeichner] from the Government’scommitment to double investment in science, which is a point of alignment on both sides I appreciate that the Minister who will respond to of the House. this debate is the Minister for Digital and Culture, not a I beg to differ with the hon. Gentleman on the two Minister from the Department for Business, Energy and things that I think businesses such as ARM need to Industrial Strategy or the Minister for Security—that prosper and thrive. The first is certainty, which is rarely serves to highlight the complexity of the issue. Last aided when the Government get involved. As the hon. time, the Chancellor took ownership; we need the same Gentleman will know, ARM made 24 acquisitions to again. We need a coherent, cross-Government response, get the business to the place it is in today. If the led from the top. I urge the Minister to consider such Government had intervened on those acquisitions, perhaps issues carefully, make the case to her colleagues and it would not have been so successful. wake up to the threat that the deal poses unless strict, Secondly, businesses need access to capital, which legally binding conditions are applied. used to be one of the great strengths of the United In conclusion, will the Minister confirm today whether Kingdom. We had a vibrant new listings market that it is the Government’s intention to refer the takeover to the Hermann Hausers of tomorrow would be looking the Competition and Markets Authority? Do the to. Another unforeseen effect of the Government making Government intend to place clear conditions on the an intervention would be that our capital markets would deal to guarantee that ARM’s HQ will stay in Cambridge; become less attractive, less competitive and less able to that jobs will be protected; that its unique business foster the ARMs of the future, which is what the model will be secured; and that its technology will not Government should seek to do to create the jobs, be a lever in future trade negotiations that this Government opportunity and prosperity that the country will need. have handed to our competitors?

Andrew Griffith (Arundel and South Downs) (Con) 12.2 am rose— The Minister for Digital and Culture (): I start by thanking the hon. Member for Cambridge Mr Speaker: Order. It is a half-hour debate. I have (Daniel Zeichner) for securing this debate on an important not been told that you wish to speak and I am not sure matter, to which he is right to bring the attention of the whether the person who is holding the debate has either. House. His constituency is a vital part of our nation’s You can intervene, but I have not been given notice of tech environment, and I fully understand that many of anybody else. Have you been told, Daniel Zeichner? his constituents’ jobs are in the sector. The Government are incredibly passionate about Daniel Zeichner: Only of one other Member. protecting a vibrant, successful and growing tech sector in the UK, and about remaining at the cutting edge of Mr Speaker: Has the Minister been told? Three people innovation. A key part of that is the design of are meant to know in an Adjournment debate: the microprocessors, which are crucial for building reliable Minister, the Chair, and the person whose debate it is. and predictable chips for worldwide customers. ARM is at the heart of that semiconductor ecosystem. As one of The Minister for Digital and Culture (Caroline Dinenage): the largest tech companies in Europe, it is hard to I am happy. overstate ARM’s significance to the wider sector, as the hon. Gentleman articulated beautifully. It has massive Mr Speaker: I am happy, but the courtesies have not potential to give our country an advantage in a wide been carried out, as I understand it. range of sectors and technologies. The Government closely monitor all acquisitions and 12 am mergers. When a takeover may have a significant impact on the UK, we will not hesitate to investigate further (Arundel and South Downs) (Con): and take appropriate action. In this case, we are working Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister and I hard to understand the full impact of the move and the congratulate the hon. Member for Cambridge (Daniel potential impact it may have on the future. From there, Zeichner) on securing this debate on a subject that is we are able to consider what steps we may wish to take. important to his constituents and to all of us. I also congratulate everybody associated with ARM, which is Daniel Zeichner: Will the Minister give way? a great British success story of the type that we need more of in this country. Caroline Dinenage: I will in a moment. I will make a I am an optimist and I believe that ARM will prosper bit of progress, then I will be happy to take the hon. under its new ownership. Nvidia is an exciting company Gentleman’s questions. that works on some of the cutting-edge technologies The Enterprise Act 2002 allows the Government to that ARM has excelled in. I hope it will open the world call in transactions on four public interest grounds: to more opportunities. I welcome, as the hon. Gentleman financial stability, national security, media plurality and has, the commitments that have been given to maintain public health emergencies. When a Secretary of State a presence in Cambridge and to build an artificial decides to intervene under the Act, they declare a public intelligence centre there. interest intervention notice. That triggers a deadline for I also hope that the new owners will enjoy the benefits the Competition and Markets Authority to conduct of operating in the United Kingdom with our adherence what it calls a phase 1 investigation. The CMA will then to the rule of law and to the English language and the engage with the parties while it gathers the information pro-enterprise environment. ARM will also greatly benefit and publishes an invitation to comment notice. That 771 ARM: Foreign Acquisition21 SEPTEMBER 2020 ARM: Foreign Acquisition 772 invites views from the merger parties and other interested Darren Jones: As a point of factual clarification, third parties on the transaction under review. At the end could the Minister confirm whether the impact of US of that phase 1 stage, the Secretary of State can: clear trade sanctions is considered in the process that she set the merger, clear the merger with undertakings, or refer out with the CMA? the merger to a phase 2 investigation. At the conclusion of the phase 2 investigation, the Secretary of State Caroline Dinenage: I think that that would depend on would consider if the transaction meets the threshold which aspect, of the four that are under consideration, for intervention on public interest grounds under the the Secretary of State was looking at. Enterprise Act, and therefore make a decision on the As the hon. Member for Cambridge and others know, necessary steps if and when it would be appropriate to the UK is a global leader in tech, with a proud history do so. of innovation and invention. Our world-leading universities, financial sector and regulatory environment have produced The reason I am explaining that to the hon. Gentleman pioneering researchers, scientific institutions and research is that I think it is really important to articulate the projects, and the UK tech sector has the world’s highest number of very careful steps we would have to take in proportion of overseas customers, driving our ability to that process. In this instance, the Secretary of State for forge global partnerships and attract the very best talent Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport would from around the world. From artificial intelligence to be the final decision maker. It is obviously extremely biotechnology, the UK has made huge breakthroughs, critical that he does so with an independent mind, generating more billion-dollar tech firms than any other having received all the relevant information and without country in Europe. Nationally, we now have 82 companies prejudice. I am sure he will understand that while I am that are worth more than $1 billion—more than France, very happy to stand at the Dispatch Box and answer as Germany and the Netherlands combined. many of his questions as possible, I have to be very careful not to say anything that could in any way We will, of course, continue to invest in science and prejudice that decision or any future moves. However, I technology and R&D-intensive emerging sectors such will try to answer as many of his questions as I can. as artificial intelligence, quantum technologies and robotics. We will also continue to promote the UK as the very As the hon. Gentleman will know, on Monday best place to start and grow a tech business. We have the 14 September Nvidia and Softbank Group announced skills, the location and the language, alongside a business- a definitive agreement under which Nvidia will acquire friendly environment, strong access to finance and a ARM Limited from Softbank in a transaction valued at long-standing reputation for innovation. $40 billion. The announcement stated that Softbank will remain committed to ARM’s long-term success Daniel Zeichner: I am grateful to the Minister for through its ownership stake in Nvidia, which is expected taking a further intervention. I just want to clarify who to be under 10%. Furthermore, the statement said that the Government have been talking to. She said that ARM will remain headquartered in Cambridge. Nvidia there have been conversations with the company—is and Softbank have made statements to the media expressing that ARM or Nvidia? It is a key difference. I understand their commitment to maintaining ARM as a successful the point she makes about the sensitivities, but the same business in the UK. They have suggested that they will was true in 2016, and it was possible then for the build on ARM’s R&D presence here by establishing a Government to secure guarantees. Why not now? global centre of excellence and will create a platform for global innovation with industry partners across multiple Caroline Dinenage: Ministers and officials have spoken fields. We will consider all those statements incredibly to various parties in recent days, and we will continue to carefully. do so as we seek to understand the full implications of this transaction from every angle. The hon. Gentleman will know how diverse our tech Jim Shannon: Yesterday’s papers suggested that last sector is in the UK. I know that Cambridge has a year ARM paid some £268 million in tax and that it has greater proportion of people in tech than any other city the potential to be Britain’s first trillion dollar company. in the UK besides Belfast, so I fully appreciate the Has the Minister had any assurances from the company worry that this causes for him and his constituents. Well about its commitment to keeping its tax base here, and over 2,000 people are based in ARM’s Cambridge thereby the tax it pays to Her Majesty’s Revenue and headquarters, and we are determined to see that continue. Customs her as well? I thank him for his continued interest. I am sorry that I have not been able to answer all his questions as fully as he would have liked me to or as I would have liked to, Caroline Dinenage: We have had conversations with but I promise that I will keep him closely abreast of this the company at various points over recent months. issue as it develops. However, I do not want to prejudice the situation in any Question put and agreed to. way, shape or form, so I do not really want to discuss any of its commercial aspects, if the hon. Gentleman 12.11 am will forgive me. House adjourned. 773 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Members Eligible for a Proxy Vote 774

Members Eligible for a Proxy Vote Member eligible for proxy vote Nominated proxy

The following is the list of Members currently certified Angela Crawley (Lanark and Patrick Grady as eligible for a proxy vote, and of the Members nominated Hamilton East) as their proxy: (Walthamstow) (Chatham and Member eligible for proxy vote Nominated proxy Aylesford) Judith Cummins (Bradford Chris Elmore Ms (Hackney Bell Ribeiro-Addy South) North and Stoke Newington) Janet Daby (Lewisham East) Chris Elmore (Birmingham, Hall Chris Elmore Green) Geraint Davies (Swansea Chris Evans West) Tonia Antoniazzi (Gower) Chris Elmore Alex Davies-Jones Chris Elmore Mr Richard Bacon (South Stuart Andrew (Pontypridd) Norfolk) David Davis (Haltemprice and Stuart Andrew Siobhan Baillie (Stroud) Stuart Andrew Howden) Hannah Bardell (Livingston) Patrick Grady Martyn Day (Linlithgow and Patrick Grady Mr (Basildon and Stuart Andrew East Falkirk) Billericay) Rachel Hopkins Margaret Beckett (Derby Clive Efford (Battersea) South) Allan Dorans (Ayr, Carrick Patrick Grady Scott Benton (Blackpool Stuart Andrew and Cumnock) South) (Bootle) Chris Elmore Sir (Mole Stuart Andrew Valley) (Birmingham, Chris Elmore Erdington) Jake Berry (Rossendale and Stuart Andrew Darwen) Philip Dunne (Ludlow) Jeremy Hunt Clive Betts (Sheffield South Chris Elmore Mrs (Dover) East) Florence Eshalomi (Vauxhall) Chris Elmore Mhairi Black (Paisley and Patrick Grady Dr Luke Evans (Bosworth) Stuart Andrew Renfrewshire South) Sir David Evennett Stuart Andrew Bob Blackman (Harrow East) Stuart Andrew (Bexleyheath and Crayford) Kirsty Blackman (Aberdeen Patrick Grady Michael Fabricant (Lichfield) Stuart Andrew North) Marion Fellows (Motherwell Patrick Grady Mr Peter Bone Stuart Andrew and Wishaw) (Wellingborough) Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen Patrick Grady Steven Bonnar (Coatbridge, Patrick Grady South) Chryston and Bellshill) Vicky Foxcroft (Lewisham, Chris Elmore Andrew Bridgen (North West Stuart Andrew Deptford) Leicestershire) Mr (Rayleigh Stuart Andrew Ms Lyn Brown (West Ham) Chris Elmore and Wickford) (Leeds East) Zarah Sultana George Freeman (Mid Conor Burns (Bournemouth Stuart Andrew Norfolk) West) Gill Furniss (Sheffield, Chris Elmore Ian Byrne (Liverpool, West Brightside and Hillsborough) Derby) Marcus Fysh (Yeovil) Stuart Andrew (Birmingham, Chris Elmore Sir (North Caroline Nokes Hodge Hill) Thanet) Amy Callaghan (East Patrick Grady Ms Nusrat Ghani (Wealden) Tom Tugendhat Dunbartonshire) Preet Kaur Gill (Birmingham, Chris Elmore Dan Carden (Liverpool, Chris Elmore Edgbaston) Walton) Dame Cheryl Gillan Stuart Andrew Sarah Champion (Rotherham) Chris Elmore (Chesham and Amersham) Douglas Chapman Patrick Grady Mary Glindon (North Chris Elmore (Dunfermline and West Fife) Tyneside) Feryal Clark (Enfield North) Chris Elmore Mrs (Maidstone Stuart Andrew Theo Clarke (Stafford) Stuart Andrew and The Weald) (Folkestone Stuart Andrew Peter Grant (Glenrothes) Patrick Grady and Hythe) Neil Gray (Airdrie and Shotts) Patrick Grady Rosie Cooper (West Chris Elmore (Wirral Chris Elmore Lancashire) West) (Islington Bell Ribeiro-Addy James Grundy (Leigh) Stuart Andrew North) (Denton and Chris Elmore Alberto Costa (South Stuart Andrew Reddish) Leicestershire) Fabian Hamilton (Leeds Chris Elmore Ronnie Cowan (Inverclyde) Patrick Grady North East) 775 Members Eligible for a Proxy Vote21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Members Eligible for a Proxy Vote 776

Member eligible for proxy vote Nominated proxy Member eligible for proxy vote Nominated proxy

Greg Hands (Chelsea and Stuart Andrew Khalid Mahmood Chris Elmore Fulham) (Birmingham, Perry Barr) Ms Chris Elmore Chris Elmore (Camberwell and Peckham) (Birmingham, Ladywood) Sir Mark Hendrick (Preston) Chris Elmore Paul Maynard (Blackpool Mark Spencer Simon Hoare (North Dorset) Fay Jones North and Cleveleys) Mrs Sharon Hodgson Chris Elmore Ian Mearns (Gateshead) Chris Elmore (Washington and Sunderland Mark Menzies (Fylde) Stuart Andrew West) Anne Marie Morris (Newton Stuart Andrew (Gravesham) Maria Caulfield Abbot) Sir George Howarth Chris Elmore David Morris (Morecambe Stuart Andrew (Knowsley) and Lunesdale) Dr Neil Hudson (Penrith and Stuart Andrew James Murray (Ealing North) Chris Elmore The Border) Ian Murray (Edinburgh Chris Elmore Imran Hussain (Bradford Chris Elmore South) East) John Nicolson (Ochil and Patrick Grady (North Stuart Andrew South Perthshire) East Hampshire) Dr Matthew Offord (Hendon) Dame Diana Johnson Chris Elmore Guy Opperman (Hexham) Stuart Andrew (Kingston upon Hull North) (Edmonton) Nadia Whittome Alicia Kearns (Rutland and Stuart Andrew Owen Paterson North Stuart Andrew Melton) Shropshire) (Worsley and Chris Elmore Sir (Hemel Stuart Andrew Eccles South) Hempstead) Afzal Khan (Manchester, Chris Elmore Dr (Central Gorton) Suffolk and North Ipswich) Sir Greg Knight (East Stuart Andrew (Bolton Chris Elmore Yorkshire) South East) Julian Knight (Solihull) Stuart Andrew (Neath) Chris Elmore (Wansbeck) Kate Osborne Ellie Reeves (Lewisham West Chris Elmore Chris Law (Dundee West) Patrick Grady and Penge) Clive Lewis (Norwich South) Chris Elmore Andrew Rosindell (Romford) Rebecca Harris Mr Ian Liddell-Grainger Stuart Andrew Mr Virendra Sharma (Ealing, Chris Elmore (Bridgwater and West Southall) Somerset) Mr Barry Sheerman Chris Elmore (Rochdale) Chris Elmore (Huddersfield) Rebecca Long Bailey (Salford Tommy Sheppard (Edinburgh Patrick Grady and Eccles) East) (Hornchurch and Lee Rowley Tulip Siddiq (Hampstead and Chris Elmore Upminster) Kilburn) Mr (Woking) Stuart Andrew Henry Smith (Crawley) Stuart Andrew Holly Lynch (Halifax) Chris Elmore (Cardiff Glasgow Chris Elmore Kenny MacAskill (East Patrick Grady Central) Lothian) Sir (South West Stuart Andrew Rachel Maclean (Redditch) Stuart Andrew Devon) Angus Brendan MacNeil (Na Patrick Grady Mel Stride (Central Devon) Stuart Andrew h-Eileanan an Iar) (Hemsworth) Olivia Blake Karl McCartney (Lincoln) Stuart Andrew Karl Turner (Kingston upon Chris Elmore Andy McDonald Chris Elmore Hull East) (Middlesbrough) Hywel Williams (Arfon) Liz Saville Roberts John McDonnell (Hayes and Zarah Sultana Harlington) Pete Wishart (Perth and Patrick Grady North Perthshire) John Mc Nally (Falkirk) Patrick Grady

11WS Written Statements 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Written Statements 12WS Written Statements HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE Adult Social Care Winter Plan Monday 21 September 2020

The Minister for Care (): I would like to update the House on the Government comprehensive BUSINESS, ENERGY AND INDUSTRIAL adult social care covid-19 strategy and its publication of STRATEGY the “Adult Social Care Winter Plan”. A copy of the plan will be deposited in the Libraries of both Houses. The coronavirus pandemic has created unprecedented Corporate Transparency and Reform of the challenges in the United Kingdom and around the Companies Register world. This has resulted in an equally unprecedented, but not unexpected, response from the social care sector The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business, and its dedicated workforce of 1.5 million people, who Energy and Industrial Strategy (Paul Scully): My right alongside the 5.4 million plus women, men and young hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State people who provide unpaid care, have made an invaluable (MinisterforClimateChangeandCorporateResponsibility) contribution to the national effort and our gratitude to Lord Callanan has today made the following statement: them all is immense. The Government published its response to the 2019 consultation Together, they have been working tirelessly to support on options to enhance the role of Companies House and increase people who need care, especially those who are older or the transparency of companies and other legal entities on Friday already living with underlying health conditions making 18 August. The consultation received over 1300 responses from all across business, academia and civil society and I am grateful to them more vulnerable to infection. all those that took the time to submit their views. Alongside extensive efforts at local level, national The response outlines the Government intention to take forward Government have provided enhanced support to the many of the measures proposed in the consultation. Our vision is sector, working with and through local leaders. This for a company register built upon relevant and accurate information support was set out in the “Adult Social Care Action that supports the UK’s global reputation as a leading exponent of Plan” and “Care Home Support Plan”. It included greater corporate transparency. Companies House will play an £3.7 billion of emergency grant funding to local authorities even stronger role as an enabler of economic growth, whilst to address the pressures on local services caused by the strengthening the UK’s ability to combat economic crime. pandemic and a £600 million infection control fund to These reforms will support the Government ambition of making support providers to reduce the rate of transmission of the UK the best place in the world to start and grow a business. Businesses will benefit from more reliable information, streamlined covid-19. and digitised processes and an improved user experience, reflecting Meanwhile, the adult social care covid-19 support the needs of business in the 21st century. taskforce, set up and chaired by David Pearson—social The key measures are: care covid-19 lead for the NHS and past president of Identity verification. We will introduce compulsory identity the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services— verification for all directors and beneficial owners—people formed part of the Government overall commitment to with significant control—and individuals filing information the sector. on behalf of a company. It would be wise to assume that coronavirus, in Reforms to Companies House powers. We propose giving addition to anticipated service demand, will place unique the registrar much stronger powers to query, seek evidence pressures on the health and care system this winter. for, amend or remove information and to share it with law enforcement partners when certain conditions are met. Covid-19 will be co-circulating with seasonal flu and other viruses, and transmission may well increase over Protecting personal information. We will give individuals more rights to remove personal information from the register, the winter period. to help protect them from fraud and other harms. It is therefore essential that we—national Government Company accounts. We propose mandating electronic filing and local partners—work closely together to make sure to bring the UK in line with international best practice and we are prepared for these additional pressures, particularly will look to simplify the filing of accounts with Companies a resurgence of covid-19 cases. We must have robust House and HMRC. We propose a further consultation on plans in place to respond to challenging events and options to deliver these reforms. These reforms will have a protect people who need care and the workforce supporting negligible impact on the speed at which incorporation and them. other filings are completed: we still expect the vast majority of companies to be able to incorporate easily within 24 The adult social care covid-19 support taskforce hours. Costs will remain low by international standards. concluded at the end of August, and its recommendations Where more information is being sought from companies, have shaped our approach to tackling covid-19 in the for example for identity verification, technological solutions adult social care sector and, in particular, the plans we will ensure that additional burdens on business and individuals have put in place for winter. are kept to a minimum. The Government will consult on further reforms to make As we approach these colder months, the Government Companies House data more useful and usable, including will play a key role in driving and supporting improved reforms to the filing of company accounts and the registrar’s performance of the system, working with local authorities powers. Once the detail of all the proposals has been settled, and the CQC to strengthen their monitoring and regulation the Government will bring forward legislation to implement role to ensure infection prevention and control procedures the reforms when Parliamentary time allows. are taking place. The key elements of our plan for social [HCWS459] care this winter are: 13WS Written Statements 21 SEPTEMBER 2020 Written Statements 14WS

Providing an additional £546 million infection control fund This crisis, awful though it has been and continues to to support infection control measures. be, for so many people, may yet be the catalyst for a new Continuing to engage with local authorities, care providers, kind of social care; services that reflect, adapt and people with care and support needs, and their families and future proof the health and wellbeing of all of us—now carers to understand their needs and provide support. and for many generations to come. Leading and co-ordinating the national response to covid-19 [HCWS458] and providing support to local areas as set out in the contain framework. Continuing to develop and publish guidance which is relevant TRANSPORT and accessible, and update policies and guidance in line with the latest evidence. We will work to proactively communicate Rail Franchises: Emergency Recovery Measures vital updates to our winter plan and other guidance. Agreements Working relentlessly to ensure sufficient testing capacity and continuing to deliver and review the social care testing strategy in line with the latest evidence and scientific advice. The Secretary of State for Transport (): We will also improve the flow of testing data to everyone When the pandemic hit, we stepped in to keep train who needs it. services running for key workers and essential supplies. Today we are renewing that support with new agreements, Providing free PPE for covid-19 needs in line with current guidance to care home and domiciliary care providers via called emergency recovery measures agreements (ERMAs), the PPE portal until March 2021. to support the UK recovery and continue the fight against the pandemic. Providing free PPE—for covid-19 needs—in line with current guidance to local resilience forums (LRFs) who wish to These agreements, which run for up to 18 months, are continue PPE distribution, and to local authorities in other designed to bring the rail franchising system to an end. areas, to distribute to social care providers ineligible for Coming into force yesterday, they contain provisions to supply via the PPE portal until March 2021. bring current franchises to an end when these agreements Making the flu vaccine available for free to all health and expire. care staff, personal assistants, and unpaid carers. They are the first step in creating a new kind of Introducing tightened measures around visiting. We recognise railway. One which is customer-focused, easy to use, that visits are important for the wellbeing of residents and good value and where the trains run on time. A structure loved ones, but with higher rates of covid-19 in the community, will take shape over the coming months. extra precautions will be needed. We have set these out in These new contracts continue to respond to the impact revised guidance. Infection control is paramount and in of covid-19 and ensure the railways continue to support designated “areas of intervention” visiting will be stopped the country’s recovery from the pandemic, delivering except in exceptional circumstances, such as end-of-life. for passengers, freight and taxpayers. They keep the Stopping all but essential movement of staff between care best elements of the private sector, including competition settings to stop the virus spreading. We know that the and innovation, that drive growth but go further by majority of care homes have already done this—now we are delivering greater leadership, direction and accountability. taking this restriction further and will enforce this through regulation. Operators have now been placed on far more demanding management agreements,with tougher performance targets, Working with the CQC to ensure that all places that receive people discharged from hospital are safe and have the highest and lower management fees. Management fees will now levels of infection control measures in place. be a maximum of 1.5% of the cost base of the franchise before the pandemic began. Supporting providers to ensure that staff who are isolating in line with Government guidance receive their normal wages Complying with current public health guidance, I while doing do. have also asked operators to run almost a full capacity service, to ensure there is space to help passengers travel Publishing the new “Adult Social Care Dashboard”, bringing safely while we continue to combat the threat of coronavirus. together data from the capacity tracker and other sources, meaning that critical data can be viewed in real time at The new contracts allow us to make an early start on national, regional and local level by national and local key reforms, including requiring operators to co-ordinate government. better with each other and driving down the railways’ Publishing information about effective local and regional excessive capital costs. protocols and operational procedures based on what we The railway will have a renewed and much sharper have learnt from so far, to support local outbreaks in the focus on delivering a reliable service which passengers event of increased community transmission. and freight users can trust. This links to Keith Williams’s This does not diminish the need for a long-term plan root-and-branch review of the railway. These measures for social care. Putting social care on a sustainable have his full support, and will pave the way for a White footing, where everyone is treated with dignity and paper on the wider future of the railway during the respect, is one of the biggest challenges our society ERMA period. faces. Until passenger numbers return, significant taxpayer support will still be needed, including under the ERMAs There are complex questions to address, to which we announced today. But these arrangements pave the way want to give our full consideration in light of current for wider rail industry reform that put passenger priorities circumstances. at the forefront and will enable substantial medium and Successive Governments have failed to “fix” social longer-term savings for the tax payer. The railway will care, but this Government have been clear that this must have a new and greater focus on delivering a reliable change. Right now, the Government No. 1 focus for service which passengers can trust. adult social care is for everyone to receive the care they [HCWS460] need throughout this pandemic. ORAL ANSWERS

Monday 21 September 2020

Col. No. Col. No. DEFENCE...... 603 DEFENCE—continued Armed Forces Capability: Future Security Overseas Territories: Covid-19 Support ...... 614 Threats...... 604 Private and Mercenary Military Forces...... 614 Armed Forces: Recruitment and Retention...... 613 Special Forces: Independent Oversight...... 615 Army Reserves: Covid-19...... 616 Topical Questions ...... 617 Beirut: Humanitarian Support...... 608 Veterans: Covid-19 Support ...... 608 Defence Helicopters: Domestic Manufacture ...... 603 Veterans: Vexatious Claims ...... 616 Government Procurement: Covid-19...... 614 Veterans Welfare Service ...... 609 Hybrid and Cyber-enabled Threats: Covid-19...... 612 WRITTEN STATEMENTS

Monday 21 September 2020

Col. No. Col. No. BUSINESS, ENERGY AND INDUSTRIAL TRANSPORT ...... 14WS STRATEGY ...... 11WS Rail Franchises: Emergency Recovery Measures Corporate Transparency and Reform of the Agreements...... 14WS Companies Register...... 11WS HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE...... 12WS Adult Social Care Winter Plan...... 12WS No proofs can be supplied. Corrections that Members suggest for the Bound Volume should be clearly marked on a copy of the daily Hansard - not telephoned - and must be received in the Editor’s Room, House of Commons,

not later than Monday 28 September 2020

STRICT ADHERENCE TO THIS ARRANGEMENT GREATLY FACILITATES THE PROMPT PUBLICATION OF BOUND VOLUMES

Members may obtain excerpts of their speeches from the Official Report (within one month from the date of publication), by applying to the Editor of the Official Report, House of Commons. Volume 680 Monday No. 104 21 September 2020

CONTENTS

Monday 21 September 2020

Oral Answers to Questions [Col. 603] [see index inside back page] Secretary of State for Defence

Covid-19 Update [Col. 623] Statement—(Matt Hancock)

United Kingdom Internal Market Bill [Col. 642] Further considered in Committee

ARM: Foreign Acquisition [Col. 766] Debate on motion for Adjournment

Written Statements [Col. 11WS]

Written Answers to Questions [The written answers can now be found at http://www.parliament.uk/writtenanswers]