Vol. 795 Wednesday No. 245 30 January 2019

PARLIAMENTARYDEBATES (HANSARD) HOUSE OF LORDS OFFICIAL REPORT

ORDEROFBUSINESS

Questions National Health Service: Missed Appointments...... 1041 Defence Safety Authority: Fire Safety Review ...... 1043 Sepsis: National Register ...... 1045 Military Equipment: Sales...... 1048 Overseas Aid Private Notice Question ...... 1050 Trade Bill Committee (3rd day) ...... 1053 Mental Health: Children and Young People Question for Short Debate...... 1115 Trade Bill Committee (3rd day) (Continued)...... 1131

Grand Committee Offensive Weapons Bill Committee (2nd Day) ...... GC 263 Lords wishing to be supplied with these Daily Reports should give notice to this effect to the Printed Paper Office. No proofs of Daily Reports are provided. Corrections for the bound volume which Lords wish to suggest to the report of their speeches should be clearly indicated in a copy of the Daily Report, which, with the column numbers concerned shown on the front cover, should be sent to the Editor of Debates, House of Lords, within 14 days of the date of the Daily Report. This issue of the Official Report is also available on the Internet at https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2019-01-30

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

No party affiliation is given for Members serving the House in a formal capacity, the Lords spiritual, Members on leave of absence or Members who are otherwise disqualified from sitting in the House. © Parliamentary Copyright House of Lords 2019, this publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. 1041 NHS: Missed Appointments[30 JANUARY 2019] NHS: Missed Appointments 1042

House of Lords appointment the GP could use the time to cover another issue.It is important if patients miss appointments Wednesday 30 January 2019 because 70% or more of them will come back. 3 pm Lord Winston (Lab): My Lords, some 15 years ago Prayers—read by the Lord Bishop of Chelmsford. when I retired from the health service, we accurately costed how much the lost appointments in my out-patient clinic cost. The figure then was over £200 per patient National Health Service: Missed in a clinic that was grossly oversubscribed, so we lost a Appointments lot of patients as a result. It is not good enough to say Question that we have looked at general practitioners. Can the noble Baroness answer the important question put by 3.07 pm the noble Lord, Lord Dobbs? It is an effective drain on Asked by Lord Dobbs the health service and results in salaries being paid unnecessarily. To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their latest estimate of the annual cost to the National Baroness Manzoor: My Lords, I agree that it is a Health Service of patients missing appointments very important issue, and the NHS is looking at it. If with their general practitioners. you miss an appointment with a consultant or GP, the costs of that service are stated very clearly. We take Baroness Manzoor (Con): My Lords, as data on the this issue seriously and are tackling it. number of missed appointments in general practice is available for only six months of the period 2017 to Baroness Walmsley (LD): My Lords, this morning I November 2018, we are unable to provide a precise had an appointment at a hospital in Wales, for which estimate of the cost. However, NHS England produced I had two reminders on my mobile phone, yet because an approximation using the limited data available, I live in Wales I do not have access to the NHS app to which suggested that the cost to the NHS of missed make appointments with my GP. First, as the app GP appointments was over £216 million a year. develops, would it not make sense to add reminder functionality to it to remind people of their GP Lord Dobbs (Con): I am grateful to my noble friend. appointments? Secondly, what discussions have taken If you add in the number of missed appointments at place with the Government of Wales to allow patients hospitals as well, the figure from NHS England—not in Wales the same advantage from digital health from the Government because they do not have figures— management as patients in England? rises to over £1 billion. It is a huge amount of money, yet recently the Government in a Written Answer Baroness Manzoor: My Lords, of course the NHS is discussing missed appointments said it did not really a devolved service, so that is a matter for Wales. It is matter because, important to have technology, and in fact some GPs “staff are able to use time resulting from missed appointments send reminders by text to let people know that they productively … This may include”, have a forthcoming appointment. giving, Baroness Lane-Fox of Soho (CB): My Lords, building “support to other patients, or spending time on personal on the last question, can the Minister please update us development”. on the ambitious targets in the 10-year plan for doctors’ I hope noble Lords will accept that perhaps that is not appointments by Skype? I believe that these will greatly sufficient. Does she accept that while of course all reduce the number of missed appointments,but investment patients have a right to the National Health Service, in infrastructure and skills for GPs and patients alike they have a responsibility to it too? I ask her to go is vital. back to the department and shake a few sticks there, so that it accepts that the department itself and not Baroness Manzoor: The noble Baroness is absolutely just NHS England has a responsibility for this problem, right that we need to ensure that the workforce is institutes some research as to why so many patients skilled enough to utilise this technology. I do not have miss their appointments, and comes up with policies the exact numbers for Skype consultations, but the that will tackle this massive drain on the resources of Secretary of State is very keen that we use technology the National Health Service. for patients who are able and have the competence to use it. However, there are other methods of contacting Baroness Manzoor: I am always happy to go back GPs, so it is not just a case of using that new technology. and shake the tree to find out the answers. I am a little bit like the Chief Medical Officer and believe that Lord Leigh of Hurley (Con): My Lords, the Minister what you can measure you can manage. To that degree, says that she is not able to disclose the numbers I agree with the noble Lord that we need greater because they are not monitored, but NHS Digital very understanding of where patients are missed and exactly helpfully gives the number of mental health service how that is managed. I also agree that there are rights appointments that are unfulfilled, as it calls them, but also responsibilities. However, some patients miss with children and young adults not turning up. In the appointments for very good reasons, and we have to year to October 2018, there were 600,000 unfulfilled understand those reasons so that we do not just think appointments. Given that the Government know the it is irresponsible behaviour; I know it is not. I agree nature of the problem, can they not take steps to with the noble Lord that if somebody misses an resolve it? 1043 NHS: Missed Appointments[LORDS] Defence Safety Fire Authority 1044

Baroness Manzoor: The Government are taking Baroness Goldie: The report in itself is an admirable steps to try to resolve this situation but, as I said, it is piece of work—thorough, analytical and robust. It not straightforward. It is not sufficient to look just at has been pivotal in ensuring and securing improvements the number of missed appointments, because patients to fire safety in MoD single-living accommodation. miss appointments for a range of reasons, particularly The specific issues to which the noble Lord referred in mental health services,and we need to better understand were indeed in the report—my recollection is that they that information. NHS England is collating that data. form part of paragraph 6.6, and led to recommendation It is not at the level at which we would like it to be but 5, which, importantly, is a priority 1 recommendation. we will of course take appropriate actions as we better I can say that the MoD has already addressed those understand it. areas of concern. The Defence Fire and Rescue Service has provided a signposting document that details a Lord Tomlinson (Lab): My Lords, does the Minister hierarchy for fire safety management across Defence. agree that there are two sides to this Question? Particularly This includes terms of reference for adequately trained with hospitals, there is also the problem of cancelling individual building fire focal points, who have been operations at short notice. I required surgery for a very appointed by their heads of establishment, so that inconvenient complaint, my operation was cancelled they can appropriately manage all fire safety risks, the day before, and I had to go for private medical such as those identified by the noble Lord, within their treatment—where I was treated by the same surgeon respective buildings. who would have treated me had my operation not been cancelled. Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con): My Lords, would this be a case of the defence fire safety establishment Baroness Manzoor: My Lords, it is always regrettable benefiting from training in this regard? I commend the when any patient has an operation cancelled. No work of what used to be called the Civil Contingencies hospital or clinical team will do that lightly; they take Centre—the EPC, as it is now called—in Easingwold, the whole situation into consideration. I am sorry which does great work in training many of the civilian about the noble Lord’s experience. fire services. Would my noble friend investigate whether this would be a possibility for defence fire establishments Defence Safety Fire Authority: if they have fallen short of best practice? Fire Safety Review Question Baroness Goldie: The report made a swathe of recommendations, leading to a total review of governance 3.15 pm and governance structures. The committee to which I Asked by Lord Lee of Trafford referred in my first Answer, the fire safety management committee, is new,and I can reassure my noble friend that Toask Her Majesty’sGovernment what assessment it meets quarterly to review progress by recommendation they have made of the report by the Defence Safety owners. If progress is unsatisfactory, the chief fire Authority Fire safety review—defence single living officer will raise concerns directly with front-line accommodation, published on 4 January. commands or other top-line budget holders. There is a process in train to ensure that progress is monitored Baroness Goldie (Con): My Lords, the Ministry of and that any tardiness or deficiencies in meeting Defence takes the safety of its people extremely seriously recommendations will be identified and addressed. and is committed to addressing the areas identified in the Defence Safety Authority’sreport Fire Safety Review. Lord West of Spithead (Lab): My Lords, the noble The MoD has taken action on recommendations and Lord, Lord Lee, is right that this is a damning indictment has established a new committee to deliver improvements. of the situation in single-living accommodation. There The Defence Safety Authority will hold the MoD to is no doubt that a lot of the single-living accommodation account for progress on the recommendations through onshore for the military is not really up to standard, its annual assurance report. and we have to put a major effort into this. I have to Lord Lee of Trafford (LD): My Lords, I am not say that, in the naval sense, the best place for single-living surprised that this report was sneaked out on 4 January, accommodation is at sea, but sadly we have too few during our Recess, having been sat on since last August. ships to have many of them there. I am sure the It is an appalling indictment of the Ministry of Defence’s Minister would agree that more ships would be a good whole approach to fire safety and to the care of idea. The report really is a damning indictment, though, personnel in its charge, despite earlier warnings. To and is it not true that it was rather sneaked out? If the quote from the executive summary, noble Lord had not brought this to my attention, for example, I would have been completely unaware that “The majority of the issues identified in this report result from a failure by Top Level Budget (TLB) Holders and Heads of such an appalling report had been produced. Establishment (HoE), as Accountable Persons (AP), to comply with Fire Safety legislative duties requiring them to have adequate Baroness Goldie: My Lords, to take the noble Lord’s arrangements in place to manage Fire Safety”. last point first, I would observe that this is an internal How does the Minister react to the news that some report so there is not an obligation to publish, but it is military personnel deliberately interfere with and disable important that it is in the public domain. I have fire safety systems for their benefit, and others apparently already reassured your Lordships that, following the illegally cook meals on camping stoves in their living report being made available to the MoD, immediate quarters to save cash? Do we not have a military steps were taken to progress recommendations, and Grenfell just waiting to happen? that has been done to very good effect. On the specific 1045 Defence Safety Fire Authority[30 JANUARY 2019] Sepsis: National Register 1046 issue that the noble Lord raises about single-living Baroness Manzoor (Con): My Lords, we are making accommodation, I entirely support his desire to have good progress in recognising sepsis and improving a well-structured Royal Navy,which I believe we have,but I outcomes. The Government’s new five-year national want it to be attending to front-line activity, not being action plan for antimicrobial resistance includes a a B&B facility.I say to him with reference to single-living commitment to develop a real-time patient-level data accommodation that, in the last decade, 50,000 bed source for patients’ infection, treatment and resistance spaces have been delivered through a modernisation history, which will be used to inform their treatment. programme. He will possibly be aware that, in the NHS England is co-ordinating this work across the financial year 2018-19, £4 million was programmed on health system, ensuring that all infections, including SLA fire safety works, and in addition £9 million has severe infections and sepsis, are appropriately managed been programmed on SLA refurbishment works that and outcomes improved. include fire safety upgrades. Lord Grade of Yarmouth (Con): I thank the Minister Lord Campbell of Pittenweem (LD): My Lords, we for that reply. I do not think the House will need can be grateful that changes have been made, but how reminding that 250,000 UK citizens are affected by was it that the circumstances were allowed to arise in sepsis each year and at least 44,000 of them die as a which the committee said there had been a lack of result—too many of these deaths are preventable. I am priority afforded to fire safety, major weaknesses and sure the House will welcome the Government’s recently an unacceptable degradation of barracks? We ask our published antimicrobial resistance strategy; developing young men and women to risk life and limb in action. real-time patient data for serious infections, especially Surely we can go out of our way to ensure that they sepsis, is a major step forward and should be welcomed. are safe in their own barracks. Can the Government assure the House that they will Baroness Goldie: I entirely agree with the noble work with partners, particularly the UK Sepsis Trust, Lord. The issues were identified in the AAR of 2016-17, and that sufficient resources are allocated to achieving when it was realised that steps had to be taken. Since this vital, life-saving project? then there has been a systematic review and efforts have been made, culminating in the excellent report that Baroness Manzoor: My Lords, this is a very important we have just been discussing, to provide the necessary area of work. The UK Sepsis Trust has done incredible safety and the improvements that we all want to see. work to raise awareness of sepsis and ensure that we continue to focus on improving outcomes for patients. Lord Houghton of Richmond (CB): My Lords, I NHS England is co-ordinating work across the health read this report. I did not find it that clear at all; it was system, including working with the UK Sepsis Trust. something of a bureaucratic emulsification. It was Of course, we are ensuring that sufficient resources are virtually impenetrable to the common reader and made available to tackle this devastating illness. The gave you the view that the sole answer to fire safety noble Lord has my reassurance on that. was the application of layers of bureaucracy. It reached something like the truth in paragraph 8.2, where it Baroness Pitkeathley (Lab): I declare an interest as talked of people disillusioned and fatigued by the someone who luckily recovered from a total-body universally accepted situation that the infrastructure sepsis and organ failure. Although more attention is was underrepaired and underresourced and there was now being given to this devastating illness, thanks to a complete absence of suitably qualified personnel. the UK Sepsis Trust among others, I understand that Does the Minister agree that this is another example in its early stages, it is very difficult to diagnose. What of the Ministry of Defence attempting to bridge the kind of training and awareness-raising is being given gap between true capability and resources by the to GPs and other primary care staff to enable them to application of hope and risk? identify it at an early stage?

Baroness Goldie: I do not agree with the noble and Baroness Manzoor: My Lords, that is a very good gallant Lord at all. I think there is a widespread question. We are working very closely with clinicians understanding across the Chamber that this report to ensure that they have the tools to diagnose this very has been pivotal in ensuring that improvements have serious condition. We do not yet have good data on all been forthcoming. I have some sympathy with him the long-term effects of sepsis, but we have developed over the opacity of some of the language; I too data analysis tools that look at all people admitted to struggled with the sea of acronyms. I finally got the hospital with infections, or sepsis, to see the impact of department to provide a diagram for me showing who actions over a long time. Of course, we are training is doing what, who is responsible to whom and where junior doctors and others to recognise sepsis in the they rest in the chain of command. I am very happy to early stages of the illness, as people are admitted to put that diagram in the Library. accident and emergency, and we have set up data Sepsis: National Register collection for serious incidences of sepsis. Question Baroness Finlay of Llandaff (CB): Do the Government 3.23 pm recognise that such a registry must go right across primary and secondary care, given that patients present Asked by Lord Grade of Yarmouth at all parts of the pathway and 25% of survivors To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans have long-term sequelae from sepsis? In that process, they have to create a national register for sepsis and will the Government undertake to look at and learn severe infection cases. from the 1000 Lives Improvement project in Wales 1047 Sepsis: National Register [LORDS] Military Equipment: Sales 1048

[BARONESS FINLAY OF LLANDAFF] Military Equipment: Sales and the HealthPathways project in Cardiff and the Question Vale, which have themselves learned from experience in New Zealand? 3.31 pm Asked by Lord West of Spithead Baroness Manzoor: My Lords, the NHS takes this issue very seriously. NHS England and clinicians are To ask Her Majesty’s Government, following the working together very closely to make sure that we liquidation of Used Equipment Surplus and Storage have good, clear datasets to enable us to diagnose this Ltd, what assessment they have made of security illness at a very early stage. Where good work is being concerns over the proposed sale of military equipment done, we are looking at that very carefully. held by that company on behalf of Leonardo S.p.A.

Baroness Jolly (LD): My Lords, sepsis does not Baroness Goldie (Con): My Lords, the Ministry of respect age; it is our biggest killer, killing more people Defence takes the safety and security of the disposal than breast, bowel and prostate cancer combined. A and storage of military equipment extremely seriously. national register for sepsis could save thousands of Officials have visited the site on a number of occasions. lives and reduce the economic burden by £2.8 billion I understand that Leonardo has today had further through improving access to healthcare and basic care discussions with the liquidator, and is confident that for sepsis. To collect the necessary data, however, the the identified equipment is not sensitive. The two public need to be brought alongside. What stage have parties are now working closely together to bring this the Government have reached in their conversation matter to a sensible conclusion. about a register with clinicians, patients and the third sector? Lord West of Spithead (Lab): I thank the Minister for that Answer. I remain concerned about this. Having Baroness Manzoor: My Lords, there is a clear need been deeply involved in the intelligence world for for better data collection on sepsis, but a registry uses many years, I know the value of getting hold of retrospective data collection. Through the Government’s equipment such as defensive aids, because you can new national action plan on AMR, we will go beyond reverse-engineer it, and look at it to see how that this and develop real-time patient data collection through country is developing techniques, even if it is an old data linkage. We will be working on this very closely. bit of kit. I am aware that a police investigation in December 2017 highlighted the fact that the police felt Lord O’Shaughnessy (Con): My Lords, my noble that some items were sensitive. Was this a List X firm friend is quite right to highlight this issue, and collecting and a List X-bonded warehouse? Are we now going to this dataset is incredibly important. One of the ways it go through in detail the equipment listed by the liquidator can be useful is in developing new diagnostic tools that to see if there is anything we should not have allowed will diagnose sepsis earlier through the use of technology. to go on to the open market? It sounds very dangerous Can the Minister reassure the House that the dataset indeed. that she says will be collected will be available to the researchers and innovators developing these tools, to Baroness Goldie: The storage company, UES&S, make sure we can diagnose sepsis quickly, fight it and was contracted by Leonardo to provide secure storage deal with some of the deaths that my noble friend has and disposal of military equipment that Leonardo no highlighted? longer required. There was no contract between that Baroness Manzoor: My noble friend is right. Data disposal companyand the MoD.I reassure your Lordships linkage will make it easier to identify those most at that the MoD has investigated Leonardo’s disposal risk of infections and sepsis, and to get them treated practices, and concluded that the company is following much quicker. Once that data is available, we will all relevant processes and disposing of equipment in ensure that clinicians and everybody else in the NHS accordance with government policy and its List X has that information so that they can deliver treatment obligations. As the noble Lord will be aware, these as quickly as possible. obligations are onerous, and apply to all items of equipment listed as secret and above. Baroness Thornton (Lab): My Lords, this is about leadership. When the Department of Health and Social Lord Campbell of Pittenweem (LD): My Lords, Care decided to bear down on hospital-acquired infections, what monitoring does the Ministry of Defence carry MRSA and C. difficile, and to collect the data and act out in relation to arrangements such as those between on it across the NHS, it happened because it was led Leonardo and the storage company? In particular, from the top of the NHS. Would it not be possible to given that the national interest may be at stake, what bring the same determination to bear on sepsis in legal advice have the Government taken on whether or hospitals? We know that GPs have to record diseases not it would be appropriate to seek an injunction and infections, so the infrastructure to do this is there. against the auction proposed for 6 February? It requires the political will to make it happen. Baroness Goldie: As we now know, there is reassuring Baroness Manzoor: My Lords, I can reassure the evidence that the items are not sensitive, but the noble noble Baroness that the political will is there, and it is Lord asks an important question. The MoD has the being done. This is what data linkage is all about—getting power to stop the sale of items, if that sale would be that data much sooner, with patients assessed much contrary to national security. I reassure your Lordships quicker than they have been in the past. that the MoD has made it clear to the liquidator of the 1049 Military Equipment: Sales [30 JANUARY 2019] Overseas Aid 1050 storage company that the sale of potentially sensitive Baroness Goldie: That might seem an easy items, if that is what they were, would have been a interpretation to make,but I suggest that it is misconceived. breach of national security. Where criminal activity is I shall explain why.It is a common commercial structure believed to have taken place, such as a breach of for the MoD to contract with a defence procurement the Official Secrets Act, we would engage further with company. That company will then subcontract other the MoD Police for them to access the site and reclaim obligations. What is important is that, where we are any sensitive items with a view to potentially stopping dealing with List X materials and equipment, the any auction. company with which the MoD contracts is under clear and enforceable obligations, which all companies Earl Attlee (Con): My Lords, does the Minister are. I emphasise that Leonardo is discharging these agree that if any person allowed a foreign power to use responsibilities.But where we are dealing with below-secret defence equipment in the way the noble Lord, Lord category items, the company is expected to ensure that West, suggested, they would still fall foul of the Official storage and disposal facilities are appropriate for that Secrets Act? equipment. There is no suggestion that Leonardo had Baroness Goldie: My noble friend makes an important not been observing the situation. There seems to have point. The Official Secrets Act, as your Lordships will been a genuine breakdown of the relationship, where, be aware, is a far-reaching piece of legislation designed I understand, over time items that were going to be to protect the national security of our country and its disposed of were not disposed of and remained in citizens. It is very easy to breach the provisions of store. The important feature is that these items, as has that Act. been confirmed today, are not sensitive. Lord Tunnicliffe (Lab): My Lords, according to Overseas Aid the Times, officials had to go to this warehouse and Private Notice Question physically inspect what was there. Does the MoD not have systems that track the whereabouts of sensitive 3.38 pm equipment? If not, why not—or is this another example Tabled by Lord Collins of Highbury of the MoD cutting corners under budgetary pressures? To ask Her Majesty’s Government in the light of Baroness Goldie: No, and I would not want any recent press reports what plans they have to meet credence to be given to such an interpretation of the their statutory obligation to spend 0.7% of the position. As I said, this is a situation where a respected UK’s GDP on overseas aid. defence contractor subcontracted a function to another company. That is not unusual in defence procurement Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab): My Lords, I beg contracts. What is important is that the proper protocols leave to ask a Question of which I have given private and standards are observed. As I indicated to the noble notice. Lord, Lord West, where there is a List X category, The Minister of State, Department for International companies have to comply with the security policy Development (Lord Bates) (Con): My Lords, the UK’s framework to ensure that they are protected appropriately commitment to spend 0.7 % of GNI on aid is enshrined under the List X clearance requirements. Weare satisfied in law and has been reaffirmed by the Secretary of that Leonardo is discharging all its obligations in that State for International Development in another place, respect. the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his most recent Lord Craig of Radley (CB): My Lords, what steps Budget, and the Prime Minister on her recent visit to did the Government take to find out where the Times Africa. The aid budget is fully funded and we have got its information? Are they satisfied that that information firm plans in place to continue to meet that important was totally inaccurate? commitment. Baroness Goldie: We can only speculate that the Lord Collins of Highbury: My Lords, last autumn, information was provided either by the liquidated the Secretary of State acknowledged that public funds company or by the liquidator. There were visits to the alone would not deliver on the sustainable development storage facility by Defence Equipment and Support, goals. Seeing 0.7% as the target rather than the baseline security officials, MoD Police and the Defence Land will not deliver either. The key to eradicating poverty Safety Regulator. They all asked UES&S for a list globally is building public services that deliver health several times but, disappointingly, it was unable to and education that are accessible to all; that will provide one. This may seem strange to the observer, encourage greater economic activity and greater but apparently this facility has been used for more investment. The Minister has a proud record on overseas than 20 years. It is full of defence and non-defence development as both a DfID and a Treasury Minister. related items. UES&S has not catalogued each item. I hope he will confirm that at next month’s spending This is apparently why it could not produce a list, but review, there will be no attempt to renege on the UK’s it would have been helpful if, when a list finally emerged, commitment—enshrined in law, as he said—to spend it could have been passed to the MoD. 0.7% of the UK’s GDP on overseas aid. Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Lab): My Lords, surely one Lord Bates: I am very proud to give the noble Lord point becomes abundantly clear: the Government, the commitment and reassurance that he seeks. The through the MoD, were not monitoring the contract commitment to 0.7% was made by the international correctly. Surely they should have known that this community way back in 1970; it was not actually was happening. introduced—under this Government, with our coalition 1051 Overseas Aid [LORDS] Overseas Aid 1052

[LORD BATES] the plight of minorities, particularly by preventing partners—until 2013. I am immensely proud of that people from religious minorities from being subjected and we remain committed to it. His point about the to discrimination, persecution and even genocide? SDGs is crucial. Achieving them by 2030, to which he and I are committed, will require some $3.9 trillion Lord Bates: I am delighted to give that reassurance. per year, according to World Bank estimates. Total This Government have been at the fore on this issue. global flows amount to some $150 billion. The only The Prime Minister has made announcements on it realistically possible way to bridge that gap in time is and has appointed her first Special Envoy on Freedom through leveraging and capitalising to get greater private of Religion or Belief, my noble friend Lord Ahmad. flows through trade and development. We are very We are proud of that, and we have to uphold, keep to committed to that, but the commitment to 0.7% stands. and maintain those standards.

Baroness Northover (LD): The UK commitment to Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Lab Co-op): My Lords, spend 0.7% of GDP on development was made via a as a former International Development Minister, Lib Dem Private Member’s Bill, which in this House I completely respect the Minister’s record. However, was in the capable hands of my noble friend Lord Purvis. Priti Patel has been quoted regularly as wanting to It passed with all-party support, for which we were undermine our international development programme; very grateful, in the last days of the coalition. The UK she also has very close links with the newspapers. How has indeed signed up to the sustainable development did those reports get into the papers today, and will he goals, which aim to eradicate to extreme poverty by make it absolutely clear that they are completely wrong 2030. Does the Minister agree that it is it right that the and that the Government are sticking to 0.7%? world—and we are part of the world, regardless of what appears to be happening politically at the moment— Lord Bates: Of course, Priti Patel, sadly, resigned as signed up to these goals, and that they are vital for Secretary of State for Development a couple of years global stability? Does he also agree that aid helps to ago. However, Penny Mordaunt is absolutely committed pump prime the economic and human development to the 0.7%—delivered by his kinsmen in Abercrombie that people in poverty so desperately need? House up in Scotland—which is of crucial importance. We remain committed to it. Lord Bates: I absolutely agree with that. The noble Baroness pointed to the proud record of the Liberal Democrats in actually providing the legislation. I remind Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD): I was the Member who her that a Conservative Chancellor is currently delivering took the Act through the House, and I was able to do on that pledge, giving £14 billion a year to the poorest so only because of the wide cross-party consensus in in this world. this House—including the Minister’s predecessor, my noble friend Lady Northover, the Labour Front Bench Baroness Chalker of Wallasey (Con): My Lords, and the Minister himself in another capacity. That will the Minister be ardent in his pursuit of match consensus had a core, which could be a component of funding, particularly for health projects, which will British leadership. We are the only developed country valuably use up at least 0.7% of the GNI? There are in the world to meet this target and to enshrine in law many countries without the basic GP facilities that we that we will continue to do so. Therefore, language all take for granted, let alone equipment for their such as “unsustainable” raises questions as to whether health services. We could do far more using training other developed economies should seek to meet their and second-hand equipment from this country as part obligations. The Minister and I are wearing our SDG of the 0.7% spending on those who are the poorest. badges close to our hearts. We know that under the current expenditure profile, those targets will not be Lord Bates: I pay tribute to the work of my noble met. British leadership in this area can be critical. Can friend as Overseas Development Minister some time the Minister say categorically that language such as ago, before that commitment was met. She is right: “unsustainable to meet our obligations” will not be health is absolutely central. We need to work in heard from a British Cabinet Minister? partnership, and that is the reason why we work with the World Health Organization, the Gavi alliance and Lord Bates: First, I pay tribute to the noble Lord the Global Fund in doing precisely that work. for taking through that legislation, which I was delighted to support myself from the Back Benches; it was Lord Alton of Liverpool (CB): My Lords, the World crucially important. We need to keep at the forefront Bank estimates that some 800 million people are racked of our minds that there is a huge need out there. We by starvation, despair or living below any rational need to build on the commitments we have already definition of human decency. The Minister is right to given and the pledges we have made, but as he rightly remind us that, as long ago as 1970, in Resolution 2626, points out, we also need to encourage others to step the United Nations urged us to find this 0.7% figure. up to the plate. Increasingly, however, we see that Does he agree that people expect their money to be Governments cannot do this alone. We need to leverage spent well? I draw his attention to a Question that I in trade and private investment to bridge that gap if asked him on the Order Paper today concerning we are to lift people out of poverty. discrimination and persecution in countries such as Pakistan, which is the biggest recipient of British Lord Flight (Con): My Lords, may I ask the Minister aid—£383,000 each and every single day. Will he ensure what proportion of the 0.7% goes via EU projects or that where British money is being spent, it will tackle other EU conduits? 1053 Overseas Aid [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1054

Lord Bates: Doing the maths quickly, I think that customs union. Without changes, rules of origin locally DfID spends about 72%, 18% goes through other should be expressed in exactly the same way as they government departments, and the remaining 10% goes currently are. My concern is that they will not be. Post through the EDF,ECHO and heading 4, but a proportion Brexit the EU will no longer be classified as “local”. of that needs to be stripped out because it relates to The UK will be the new “local”. So a new definition gift aid. If my noble friend can do the calculations, will need to be written into these rollover trade deals, that is the net effect. where “local”—which until leaving the EU meant inside the whole of the EU—will now mean not just Lord McConnell of Glenscorrodale (Lab): My Lords, the UK but the UK and the rest of the EU. at the heart of some of the suspicions about the The issue of rules of origin is inextricably linked delivery of the commitment lies the spending of with our membership of the customs union. The big ODA through departments other than DfID. Will the advantage now of being inside the customs union is Minister take this opportunity to reassure us that in that no tariffs or taxes are placed on imports or the Government’s Agenda 2030 voluntary national exports of goods traded between member states.Fulfilling review to the United Nations this summer, they will the country-of-origin principle ensures that products take the opportunity to explain how overseas development can enjoy zero tariffs as part of free trade deals if they assistance spent by the Foreign Office, the Ministry meet the requirement: conversely, if they do not, they of Defence or other government departments will not. To give a practical example, trade deals in the contributes to the delivery of the sustainable development car industry usually require about 55% of the components goals? of a car to be considered as local. But most cars made Lord Bates: I am happy to do that. As the noble in the UK have just 40% of UK-only content. If we Lord knows, having done a lot of work in this area, then look at the fact that many of the subcontractors the majority of the least developed, most fragile countries source many of their parts from abroad, a UK-made that we drive our aid spend towards are in that position car could be less than 30% made in the UK. This is because of conflict. We need to recognise that although improved and passes a 55% threshold due to the fact development is one part of this, there is a development, that other manufactured parts of the car come from diplomacy and defence nexus. We need to work EU countries, currently classified as local. I ask the together, and that is what those cross-Whitehall funds Minister: when we leave, how will this be addressed in are doing. each of the possible exit scenarios, as this is pertinent to the rollover of existing trade agreements? I also ask Trade Bill the Minister to clarify, if amendments need to be Committee (3rd Day) made to the text of existing trade agreements, how parliamentary scrutiny of those changes will be handled. 3.50 pm I beg to move. Relevant documents: 33rd Report from the Delegated Powers Committee, 13th Report from the Constitution Committee Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD): My Lords, I congratulate the noble Lord on moving his first amendment to a Bill. It does not get any easier—I do not wish to Amendment 31 offer any false reassurance—but I happily concur with Moved by Lord McNicol of West Kilbride his remarks in moving the amendment. I have little to 31: After Clause 5, insert the following new Clause— add except to reinforce the point that, for the UK in “Rules of origin particular, the majority of our imports from our It shall be the objective of an appropriate authority to biggest market and an even larger majority of our negotiate as a term of all international trade agreements exports are intermediary. They include components implemented under section 2 that goods subject to the that are from a number of different countries and not agreement which have originated in the European Union from here. shall be treated as if they had originated in the United Kingdom.” This issue was raised briefly with the Minister on the cross-border taxation Bill. It is the complexity not Lord McNicol of West Kilbride (Lab): My Lords, just of the components but what is necessary to ensure Amendment 31 is a short amendment but an important that many UK exported goods and our imported one. This is my first Bill and first amendment from the consumer goods have a seamless transaction process. Opposition Front Benches in your Lordships’ House, It is less about the tariffs applied and much more so please forgive any mistakes from the outset. about the regulatory aspects and checks that will be Nowhere, as far as I can see, are rules of origin necessary, which I shall turn to in a moment. Therefore, mentioned or dealt with in the Bill. This is worrying for our key sectors—the noble Lord mentioned for a number of reasons. Most importantly, rules of automotive, but for wider engineering and overall origin will have a huge impact on the UK’s efforts to production and for our exporters— this issue is critical. replicate our current EU trade agreements with other I will cite one example from HMRC’s advice to countries. Rules of origin are about how we define businesses that is close to my heart, living in an area where a product or products really come from, and that has a rich tradition of manufacturing in textiles. what “Made in Britain” actually means. It is important It shows some of the complexity when rules of origin to the Bill because, if we are to take the Government have to be applied. Each business has in effect to do its at their word, this is just a Bill to allow the rollover of own certification. The advice states: existing trade agreements—agreements that we currently “For example, yarn spun from non-originating man-made have because of our membership of the EU and fibres in France”, 1055 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1056

[LORD PURVIS OF TWEED] negotiations. That is clearly no longer the case because, would not be considered as originating within the EU as the Secretary of State for Exiting the European for preferential purposes when considering whether Union and the Prime Minister herself have said, rules of origin apply. Parliament has set the Government a mandate with “However, cloth woven from that yarn in the UK would be an regards to the Northern Ireland protocol. So there is EU originating product, just as if the weaving had been done in no barrier to the Government accepting the language France or Germany”. of these amendments. As to the necessity of them, it is That is one tiny example of where, if we do not have a very clear that this is what most of the industrial customs union with our biggest market, we will have sectors of this country are seeking. difficulty with rules of origin with our largest market and then, as we move to trade with other countries outside 4 pm the customs union, we will have difficulty in deciding Lord Lansley (Con): My Lords, if I may add something which are applicable for other preferential or other to this group of amendments, first, I say well done to trade policies. the noble Lord, Lord McNicol. He passed the first That is part of the complexity that leads to test: one of the Opposition’s central jobs is to know Amendment 51 in my name, which is in the view of which subjects should be raised in Committee and these Benches necessary to align with our biggest make sure that they are raised. He has done us a market in order for us to exploit trade with other service by doing exactly that. markets. We need to triangulate as little as possible, Turning to these two amendments, neither is practical which seems to be what the Government seek. The as drafted, but we can probably leave that to one side best way to do that is through these arrangements. I and focus on what we want to achieve on rules of understand that there is tacit agreement from the origin. The first reason it is not mentioned in detail in Government on this point, because the announcement this Bill is that Section 17 of the Taxation (Cross-border last week of an in-principle agreement with Israel to Trade) Act effectively puts the rules of origin requirements roll over our agreement means that it seems that the into law. They are the same, as far as I can see, as United Kingdom is in principle considering what is in would apply generically to rules of origin under the effect a rules of origin regime with the EU, the EEA, revised Kyoto convention. The country of origin must Switzerland, the Faroe Islands, Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt, be identified as that country or territory in which the Jordan, Israel, Montenegro, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia last substantial process took place. But that does not and Turkey—all countries that have in effect a rules of really answer the point. origin regime. This is where we come to the existing international It would be helpful if the Minister could clarify the trade agreements that we might roll over. They will Government’s intention for rules of origin in the existing have been constructed on the basis that any processing rollover agreements and how they consider the future. that took place in the United Kingdom was processing However, even if we operated under such a regime, within the European Union. We cannot assume that, necessary checks and certification still have to be done when these international agreements are rolled over— electronically; each exporting company has to apply its whenever that will be, but a couple of years from now, four-digit tariff heading and carry out its own checks I hope—products originating in the United Kingdom on whether rules of origin are being complied with. If will be defined as including processing inside the European we are to have a separate anti-dumping and corrective Union. We will have become a third-party country. measures system—which, incidentally, the Government That is unless, in the form that they rolled over, the promised us for consideration before the final stages countries with which these agreements have been made, of the Bill—and if we are to have a preferential rules and with which we enter into our future agreement, of origin system for developing countries, we will have accept that origination should be cumulated between to have some form of check system to ensure that those us and the European Union. countries comply with it. It is one thing to say that we If I am asking a question of my noble friend the will have an electronic system for our closest trading Minister it is: can we look to cumulation between the partner—but how will we know that it is not being United Kingdom and the European Union as being abused by other countries that wish to circumvent it? a feature of the rollover agreements, such that, from Up to the Lords stage, the Government said that the business point of view, what they have understood the language as set out in these amendments would to be the situation prior to exit day becomes the necessarily tie their hands and weaken their negotiating situation after exit day? That is essentially what we are flexibility by having them take all necessary steps—but looking for. this is no longer the Government’s position because Declaring an interest, 28 years ago I was deputy we see that language in Clause 6. This is now government director-general of the British Chambers of Commerce. language, where it relates it to the European medicines That movement was and is responsible for the issuing regulatory network. The Government seemingly do of certificates of origin, so it understands this rather not intend to bring forward any amendments to delete well. Of course, that applies outside the European that from the legislation, so if they do not then that is Union at the moment. If we are in a customs union, the government language. That means that the all those problems go away, but we had that debate on Government should not have any problem with accepting day two of Committee. this language. If we must deal with this issue, I say to my noble Secondly, the Government said, prior to yesterday, friend that I hope the Government’s discussions with that it would be inappropriate for Parliament to set a the British Chambers of Commerce have been productive. mandate for how the Government should take forward I know that two years ago, the movement said that, 1057 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1058 given the nature of international supply chains, ensuring for example, we could make the decision that we that a “Made in Britain” badge can continue to be would reduce our tariffs to zero, she is absolutely right displayed proudly on products originating in this country that we could not make them zero only for the European will require us to re-enter some complex definitions of Union; that would also have to be done for everyone the relationship between international supply chains else under WTO rules, but there is no requirement for and origination in the United Kingdom. It also said us to be treated in a reciprocal way. In fact, we would that it was happy to work with government to look at be very unlikely to be treated in a reciprocal way, how that might be achieved in future. I hope that this because if the European Union was to look at us and will come forward in our discussions on Report to say, “We will be reciprocal and offer zero tariffs to the demonstrate that the Government have an idea of UK”, it would then be required under its various trade what future trade agreements might say about origination agreements to offer a whole raft of countries across to ensure that the “Made in Britain” scheme is not the globe zero tariffs, thus convoluting its entire trading frustrated in circumstances where we think of a product system. There is an imbalance in that argument which as British. sometimes does not quite get heard. Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con): My Lords, I I cannot think of a worse situation for our farmers add my congratulations to the noble Lord, Lord McNicol, than finding that they have high tariffs on their exports on taking his place and on his performance today. but no tariffs to protect them from imports flowing in. Given his history, I am sure that negotiating procedures Some people have said that that is ideal because it in your Lordships’ House will be less turbulent than in means that food costs would fall, but they would do so other places where he has worked. I thank both him at the cost of wrecking, frankly, a swathe of one of our and the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, for giving us the much-loved industries. opportunity to, in my case, put questions to the Minister I want to pick up on rules of origin in a slightly and probe the issue. different way, and I will refer to the point that the In particular, what will be the position in the interim noble Lord, Lord Lansley, has been making. When period of our leaving the European Union? My noble the Minister was kind enough to invite us around the friend the Minister pointed out in our debate— table to ask questions ahead of Second Reading, I did on Monday, I think—that there would be a period for try to press on some issues around rules of origin. As these agreements, having been initialled, to be signed I understand it, for these rollover agreements, the UK and approved by the relevant Parliaments. My would turn to the country with which it wishes to keep understanding is that if we leave under World Trade the trade agreement and say, “We would like you to Organization rules, agreements in this interim period treat goods made in the European Union as British will be on the basis of non-discrimination. So, if we, as content in the way you do now, in order for us to have a third country—my noble friend Lord Lansley correctly zero tariffs when we export the goods”. I shall take a identified that we would be—chose to extend agreements simple example, “When we export this car, we would to current European Union members and said, as like you to treat the European content in it basically as many noble Lords have suggested, that we wished to local content for the purposes of a zero tariff”. The impose zero tariffs, those agreements would have to be officials were quite clear that the UK could do that extended on a reciprocal, non-discriminatory basis. Is unilaterally and that we would not need the permission my understanding correct? In an interim period of of the European Union. what might be one or two years before such agreements I then raised this with a number of people outside are rolled over, whatever our preference, whatever we this environment who said, “You must be joking. offered to our existing European partners would have Which country is going to infuriate the European to be offered to every other country with which we Union by allowing its goods to be treated as local wished to trade, on the basis of non-discrimination. I content for the UK unless there is some form of do not think we have grasped that point. Obviously, it balancing agreement with the European Union on this would be helpful to understand the implications for issue?” In other words, the thought that you can cut our trading arrangements. the European Union out of this discussion and simply There is deep concern among the farming community do it on a bilateral basis is incredibly fanciful. For that tariffs imposed could be as high as 40% for most countries, keeping a good trading relationship certain products and 60% for lamb, at a time when we with the European Union is, frankly,far more significant are exporting more meat than we ever have, historically. than having a trading relationship and rolling over the That would hit our producers particularly hard. It is existing deals with the UK. The European Union is causing real hardship in the hills because many of our going to have to be engaged in some way or allow itself farmers do not know whether to produce lamb; the tacitly to be used in this way. supply of lamb to the home market could dry up. We would therefore import more lamb, beef and pork at a The Government are currently negotiating these time when we should be increasing our exports there. I deals, and we understand that they are currently in the simply want to take this opportunity to seek answers process of establishing the rollover agreements. Can to those queries from my noble friend. they tell us whether they have an understanding with the European Union that will indeed permit EU content Baroness Kramer (LD): My Lords, I have questions to be treated as local content for the purposes of these that arise from the previous speeches which I hope the trade deals, or will they be having some stern discussions Minister will be able to help me with. Perhaps I may with the various countries with whom we wish to have say to the noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh, that I am these ongoing continuity bilateral arrangements? It sure she recognises that, while in a no-deal scenario, would be very interesting to know. 1059 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1060

[BARONESS KRAMER] transactions that theoretically could benefit from the My understanding is that when South Korea was free trade agreement actually do. If a free trade agreement first approached about treating EU content as local gets up to 40% of the eligible product taking advantage content for goods whose final point of export is the of it, that is extraordinary and an amazingly good free UK, its answer was, “That is interesting and we think trade agreement. that it would be a fair thing to do, but of course we I wonder if the Minister could help us through all would expect goods originating in China and forming this, to help us understand how much trade she thinks part of the content of South Korean goods to be given is dependent on being able to roll over these free trade the same kind of benefit. We think that there is an agreements successfully; what the cost will be for opportunity to make sure that there is an equal playing companies that now attempt to use them to export field in this area, because negotiating with the UK is directly rather than via the EU—which is how they not the same as negotiating with the EU. We are now used to stay out of having to fill these wretched forms in different circumstances”. I wonder how many countries out—but also, more fundamentally, the issue that the aside from South Korea which are involved in these noble Lord, Lord Lansley, raised: how are these deals rollover agreements have come back to the UK—I can now captured in these free trade agreements? see that Israel would not because it is not particularly Are we able to use EU content as local content, and in that situation—saying that they wish to have the does the Minister accept that the EU has to have given new flexibility that we are requesting reflected in a at least tacit permission for that to happen for this change in the flexibility that they are being offered. It arrangement to be viable? This is one of the reasons would be helpful if the Government could let us know why the amendment from the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, if that is happening. is important: it asks for a reciprocal arrangement, 4.15 pm where we give our permission to the EU to use UK product as local content in any trade deals it wishes to I also want to raise the issue of the cost of the pursue. That creates a problem: does the EU have to whole process of trying to establish rules of origin—talk now renegotiate most of its free trade deals if it wishes about a non-trade barrier. It is phenomenally expensive. to continue to use UK content in order to meet the I have given the example before of trade across the benchmark? If that is true, there is a great advantage Irish border. At the moment, of course, rules of origin for companies inside the EU to divert away from are completely irrelevant, but much of the economy of UK suppliers in order to pick up EU suppliers whose the island of Ireland has merged into a single economy content can qualify under rules of origin. over the last decade. I was in conversation with a small supplier selling stationery goods. The only wholesaler from which it can get its goods happens to be in the Lord Davies of Stamford (Lab): My Lords, the fact south, so a weekly truck comes over from the north. that, if the Government have their way, in two months’ Rules of origin would require that every single item of time we shall be dragged out of the single market is a different kind in that shipment has its own declaration. tragedy of great proportions which will affect everyone If a suit has one set of buttons, that is one whole set of in this country with not the slightest doubt. That is declarations. For a different set of buttons, that is particularly sad and ironic because of the great efforts another. If there is a filing cabinet with black pens, that were put into the creation of the single market, blue pens, pencils and different sizes of paper,everything particularly by this country. There is no question that needs its own separate rules of origin certification. the major movers were not Lord Cockfield and From asking around generally and talking with chambers Margaret Thatcher. What is more, the single market of commerce, my understanding is that the cheapest has been an inspiration around the world. As others you could get that certificate for is £30. So for this seek to imitate the achievement and derive the great company that has maybe 20, 30 or 40 different types of benefits that we have had, the British Government can product in that little truck, you are suddenly multiplying think of nothing better than to take us out of the that by 30, just for that one weekly truck-load. It is a original single market. huge cost. This raises many practical problems, as we have I also tried talking with lawyers about free trade seen. We have heard three extraordinarily well-briefed, agreements. I think a couple of other Peers were considered and well-informed speeches on this subject engaged in some of these conversations. I came to by the noble Lord, Lord Lansley, and by the noble understand that rules of origin are such a problem Baronesses, Lady McIntosh and Lady Kramer. The that most small companies do not take advantage of noble Lord spoke particularly about the difficulties free trade agreements, because to satisfy the benchmark which will arise in connection with the definition or of the free trade agreement they have to provide rules redefinition of rules of origin; and the noble Baronesses of origin certificates. Very big companies with an spoke extremely well about the threats and complexities accounting department, a legal department, a procurement we shall face because of the rules of the WTO and the department, an IT department and whatever else, possibility that we will suffer considerable perverse moving a large amount of identical product, can manage costs as a result of leaving the single market. These to do certificates of origin relatively easily. There is a have never been properly considered in this country by cost, but it is manageable. But for a small entity the the Government and, therefore, private individuals, costs are phenomenal and extremely complex, because trade associations and businesses up and the down the it involves intellectual property and how that is valued, country have also not had enough time or opportunity the value of warranties and issues of royalties. It is an to consider and reach a conclusion as to what the extraordinarily complex process, and therefore under concrete impact will be in all probability on their many trade agreements only about 10% of the trade own businesses. 1061 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1062

That is the point of my intervention. It is not when he returns to Canada and joins in the political reasonable to ask tens of thousands of businesses process there, is not going to call for Canada to have a which may well be affected by the changes that the customs union with the United States to overcome all Government are trying to enforce on the country in these supposedly insurmountable difficulties. They are this regard to pick through all the volumes of Hansard not insurmountable and they are going to get somewhat in the House of Commons and the House of Lords simpler. where these matters have been debated, even supposing— The EU is bringing in the REX system for self- which was not the case on the last occasion we debated declaration of rules of origin—you will have to do the this matter—that the Government give informative calculations but you will not have to buy a certificate; answers to the questions that have been raised. you will just declare the origin of the goods. Of My question to the Minister today is: does she course, you will have to get it right; as with any propose, or has she already perhaps set in motion, an self-declaration, you will be open to investigation and effort to inform businesses directly about these matters; checks if there is any reason to suppose you are to set out for the benefit of British business in different cheating, but it will simplify the process greatly. sectors the potential threats—or indeed the opportunities, Can the Minister confirm that we will be able to if there are any—from the policies that the Government join the pan-Euro-Med convention on rules of origin are pursuing in this area; and to answer definitively if we have a free trade agreement with any member of the questions that have been raised today about rules that convention—for example, Israel? I believe that of origin, the impact of the WTO non-discrimination when you belong to it you can begin to assess diagonally, rule and principle, which has been set out so well, and as they say, the components of your goods when you any other WTO rules which may have an impact on export among them. If that is open to us, it will ease the trading conditions for British companies which are things as far as we are concerned for a large group of trading with either the European single market after countries. the end of March this year or with countries which currently have trade agreements with the Union? In that latter context—my final remark today—can Lord Purvis of Tweed: It is less a point of the we please have some absolute clarity about what is inability to trade with countries on WTO rules of happening to those countries which currently have origin principles—they have been established for many free trade agreements with the European Union and years and will continue, and the EU uses them with where we have the ambition to roll over those free non-EU countries. The difference the noble Lord is trade agreements? How many countries have accepted alluding to is a mutual recognition of the rules of in principle to roll over the agreement as it currently origin principles that we have agreed through the EU exists without any substantive change? How many with, for example, Norway and Switzerland. This means countries have expressed the willingness in principle to that, as far as cumulation is concerned—and given roll over an agreement but are asking for substantive that the majority of British imports and exports are changes? cumulated products with our biggest market—the critical factor is the non-burden that comes with other checks Most people, I suspect, will ask for a particular that we would not have if we were a non-member of concession of interest to them. They will take the either a customs union or, indeed, a grouping that opportunity to get something if they can. At the very meant that all other regulations were aligned, as those least, this will result in many months of discussion and countries have opted to do, and I think his position is negotiation. In some cases, it may require us to make that we should not do. concessions that will be expensive for British industry or business. We need to know exactly where we stand here. I hope the Government themselves know the Lord Lilley: I am not sure that I said any of the answers to these questions—I sometimes get the feeling things that I think the noble Lord is both telling me I that they do not. If the Minister thinks that that is said and that are not true. I suspect what he said is true unfair she has the opportunity this afternoon to make but it is not what I said. Forgive me if I do not really the position absolutely clear to the House and the respond to his point, which I do not fully understand. whole country. My point was that there is the pan-Euro-Med convention which has the same rules of origin among Lord Lilley (Con): My Lords, I congratulate the all the countries. Cumulation is allowed between them. Minister on introducing this debate and focusing on You can join the convention when you have a free rules of origin, which is the main complexity that will trade agreement with one member of it—at least, that arise with trading goods. I suggest that this should not is what I am asking the Minister to confirm is the case be exaggerated. It is the big difference between free and will be the case when we have a free trade agreement trade areas and customs unions but I note that the with Israel, to start with. Swiss, who have a free trade agreement with the EU—not The noble Baroness, Lady Kramer, talked about a customs union—do not seem to be too upset about the costs. I do not know if she is familiar with the that. They do not seem to be calling for a customs study of the costs—which I think is the most recent union. They seem to be coping with all the problems and the most authoritative—carried out by the World that noble Lords have told this House are insurmountable; Customs Organization. It searched through all the the Norwegians likewise. previous studies and found them to be deficient. The The Canadians have a free trade agreement with level of cost is actually much lower than had previously America but are not calling for a customs union. Even been thought. That must be true if the Swiss assessment our Canadian Governor of the Bank of England, of the total cost of their trade across the borders is 1063 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1064

[LORD LILLEY] Lord Davies of Stamford: I am sorry to interrupt correct, because they believe that it is only 0.1% of the the noble Lord again, but I will just correct him on this value of their trade, including the cost of complying matter. If he looks at the figures, he will see that with rules of origin. France and Germany have increased their trade at a I advise the Committee as a whole to read that much faster rate than we have while being in the single report. I am sorry that I cannot give the reference but I market. The reason is that, sadly—we know that it is a can give the reference to a document in which the big handicap for us all—productivity in this country reference is given—namely, a document that I myself has risen much less fast than that of Germany, France wrote called Fact—NOT Friction. I urge noble Lords and other members of the EU. to read it, as they will find the appropriate reference. Lord Lilley: It is quite true that other countries 4.30 pm within the single market have increased their exports Baroness Kramer: The noble Lord, Lord Lilley, is to each other more than we have—but that is not right that I have not read the document. I have just purely because of differences in productivity. Indeed, taken my information from fairly extensive conversations our GDP over most of that period has grown rather with companies. Perhaps they do not know what they more rapidly than that of many other members of the are doing. single market. I do not know what the factors are but I would not just assume that it is all due to the Lord Lilley: Perhaps the World Customs Organization wonders of the single market that somehow have knows nothing about customs, but we have to reach not yet reached us. the judgments that we can, and certainly under the REX system the fees that the noble Baroness referred The Minister of State, Department for International to will not have to be paid, as I understand it. However, Trade (Baroness Fairhead) (Con): My Lords, before again, I ask the Minister to confirm that. addressing the amendment directly,I too warmly welcome Finally, the noble Lord, Lord Davies, waxed eloquent the noble Lord, Lord McNicol of West Kilbride, who about the single market. I take that as personal praise, is making his first contribution at the Dispatch Box as I had to introduce the whole single market legislation today. I share the view of the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, back in the early 1990s and spoke eloquently about that it probably will not get any easier, but I very much how it was going to boost our trade. How sad we, and look forward to our debates. he, must be that in the ensuing 25 years our exports to I am grateful to the noble Lords, Lord McNicol fellow members of the single market have risen by just and Lord Purvis, for tabling Amendment 31. As the 18%. It did not have quite the big and wonderful noble Lord, Lord McNicol, said, it is a short amendment, impact that I hoped it would have and which he in but it covers an important area. I confirm that the retrospect believes occurred. Our trade with the rest of Government share the objective of the amendment. the world rose by 72%, so let us get these things into We are committed to ensuring that the rules of origin perspective. used in our continuity agreements enable businesses to continue to operate, as much as possible, through their Lord Davies of Stamford: The noble Lord is, once established value and supply chains. That is particularly again, moving into the dangerous business of making important where integration with EU supply chains is elementary errors in the interpretation of statistics. significant. Quite clearly, where we had a relationship with mature markets, as we did when we joined the single market, I wish to reassure noble Lords about the concerns we were not going to have the same rate of growth in that may have prompted the amendment. As I have trade as we had with countries that were still very stated, there are technical issues in continuity agreements poor and were maybe just beginning to embark on that cannot be simply cut and pasted. Rules of origin international trade. A mature economy is not going to are among those. We are continuing to work with third have the same rate of growth in trade as a newly countries to deal with the issues involved, with the emerging economy. It is an absolute falsehood to try objective of ensuring continuity for businesses and to compare the two and draw the conclusions that he consumers when the UK leaves the EU. has drawn. The noble Baroness, Lady Kramer, asked about negotiations with partners without involving the EU. Lord Lilley: It is always a pleasure to be patronised Just to clarify, the ROOs for each agreement are by the noble Lord, Lord Davies. As someone who negotiated bilaterally between the parties. The sequence passed only parts 1, 2 and 3 of the Institute of Statisticians of such agreements is such that we need to negotiate exams, I suppose that I must give way to him if he bilaterally with partners before negotiations open with passed part 4. I fully know the difference. If he looks, the EU. EU producers and exporters will benefit from for example, at a group of countries which are at a EU content being treated as UK content in our continuity similar level of development to ours and which trade trade agreements, as their business arrangements will with the EU single market, he will see that their not be disrupted. I can confirm that the UK does not exports rose significantly more than ours did over that need to ask the EU for permission to do this. 25-year period. I do not know quite why that is but it is Our approach includes using standard rules of clear that trading within the single market has not had origin mechanisms to remain as closely aligned with such a big impact on our exports to the rest of the EU the status quo as we possibly can. Importantly, as as I certainly expected it to have at the time and as he Amendment 31 advocates, this approach includes seeking believes in retrospect it has had. to ensure that UK and third-country exporters can 1065 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1066 continue to make use of EU content in their exports to Baroness Fairhead: I believe my noble friend is one another. As my noble friend Lord Lansley correctly posing a slightly different question. I will come on to said, this is referred to as cumulation. the EU negotiations. The response was about third As with many other aspects of international relations, countries and the certification required. our partners understandably view our negotiations and discussions as sensitive, so we are unable to give precise Baroness Kramer: The point made by the noble details on progress at this time. Nevertheless I will Lord, Lord Lansley, is crucial, because otherwise there reassure the Committee that discussions on rules of is a huge incentive for anyone in the EU to find an origin are progressing constructively. As my noble alternative supplier. Finding alternative suppliers in friend Lord Lilley pointed out, because there is mutual the UK for a product produced in Poland, Spain or benefit there is a willingness to engage. wherever else is quite difficult because frequently we do not produce those particular goods. However, across the whole of the 27 it is likely that there would be a Lord Purvis of Tweed: The Minister is clear that it is number of alternative suppliers. Our companies need the Government’s intention unilaterally to say to all third to know if they are in jeopardy, which is why the countries that components from the EU would be question matters. considered part of UK goods. What comes with that is certification, and showing the evidence from the European Baroness Fairhead: It is of course for the EU to Union suppliers. Currently, the European Union has determine what they recognise. Our priority for the its set of certifying conditions as to where products EU/UK trading relationship is for it to be as frictionless originated. Is the Government’s position that we are as possible. What the UK has proposed is no tariffs, unilaterally saying that those component parts should no quotas, no routine requirements for rules of origin be considered as from the UK? Will we be using in for goods traded between the UK and the EU, and perpetuity all the European certification and proof of cumulation provisions with trading partners. Clearly origin processes? the final outcome will be for negotiation between the UK and the EU. Baroness Fairhead: Let me clarify for the noble Lord. As he will be aware, rules of origin determine Lord Liddle (Lab): I am sorry to intervene. I was the origin of goods. Regulations then implement those not here for the opening speech, which is very bad of rules of origin in domestic legislation, under the Taxation me. As I understand it, at the moment, on the assumption (Cross-border Trade) Act 2018. The certification and that we are going to reach an agreement with the EU, verification of the ROOs of each good will be consistent the EU is being very co-operative in saying that British with current practices under the EU’s trade agreements. goods should be treated as EU goods for the purposes Exporters will need to certify the origin of their goods, of our agreements with other countries. There is of as they do currently. course a problem if we have no deal, particularly if we have an acrimonious no deal. What would the situation Lord Purvis of Tweed: May I press that point a little be then? I cannot believe that the EU would exercise further? Currently, a British exporter will require a the degree of co-operation on this question that it is movement certificate—EUR1, or EUR-MED if it applies presently demonstrating the willingness to do. to the pan-European Mediterranean cumulation that we have already discussed under this group of amendments Baroness Fairhead: That is exactly whythe Government —or a declaration of an invoice or commercial document, are clear that the preference is for a deal. That is what such as a packing list or consignment note. These are we are trying to achieve, because it is in the best European Union certificates, which are recognised interests of the UK. solely by the European Union. If we are no longer in Amendment 31 also aims to tie Ministers’ hands the EU, how will our certificating process match the and compromise their ability to reach agreements that EU process, given that it would concern exactly the are in the best interests of the UK. As the Committee same component part? will be aware, it is neither beneficial nor appropriate for this House to fetter the Government’s capability in Baroness Fairhead: I hoped and believed that I had that regard. Therefore, as it is already an objective of addressed that question. The answer is yes: that the Government to seek continuity through cumulation certification would continue as it currently does. That or any other technical process, it is neither necessary is the information I have but if the situation is any nor appropriate to place a legal obligation of this kind different, I will write to the noble Lord. in the Bill. Lord Purvis of Tweed: The Minister might be able Lord Lansley: I hope my noble friend will forgive to help me. Clause 6(1), as introduced into this House, me for interrupting. Just so that we are absolutely states: clear on which question we are having answered, it is “It shall be the objective of an appropriate authority to take about reciprocity. If, in relation to these agreements, all necessary steps to implement an international trade agreement, we in this country are treating EU content as UK which enables the UK to fully participate after exit day in the content and having it accepted as such, the question European medicines regulatory network partnership”. that we are looking to have answered is: will the EU’s Why does that not bind the Government’s hands and continuing agreement with that same third-party country restrict their freedom, when the Minister says that mean that UK content is treated as EU content for the exactly the same language used in this amendment purposes of its origination? seems to bind the hands of the Government? Either 1067 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1068

[LORD PURVIS OF TWEED] Baroness Kramer: I am sorry, but I was asking the Government will seek to change the language in about a no-deal scenario, because that is what this Clause 6 or they should have no problem with the legislation is about—preparation for no deal. language in these amendments. Baroness Fairhead: I stress one more time that this 4.45 pm legislation is not about no deal. It is about making sure that we have the capability and powers to implement, Baroness Fairhead: As the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, whatever happens. Plan A is for a deal and the clauses will be aware, that was an opposition amendment, in the Bill aim to achieve the powers and make sure with which the Government did not agree. The that we can put them into effect. We have to be prepared Government are reflecting on those words and I do for no deal. I reiterate that it is not the desired outcome, not think he can assume that they will necessarily but we have to make sure that the Bill has the ability to accept that. cover both. My noble friend Lady McIntosh raised the issue of I hope that the statement I have made, and my what would happen in a no-deal scenario and asked answers to questions, have provided clarification and whether non-discrimination would apply. The noble some reassurance to the Committee, and I therefore Baroness, Lady Kramer, is correct; there is no reciprocal respectfully ask the noble Lord to withdraw— obligation if we set our tariffs at zero. That is why the Government have been clear that a deal is the best thing and we are doing all we possibly can to achieve Lord Lansley: If my noble friend will permit me, I that. wanted to ask one question. I know we are not debating future agreements but the manner in which rules of Amendment 51, tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, origin are to be established in UK legislation in future. seeks to secure a binding commitment from the EU on We should work with the chamber of commerce the EU’s own future trade agreements. As I said, our movement to try to make that work with the business priority for the UK-EU relationship is for it to be as community as well. frictionless as possible. Regarding the objective of this amendment, we believe it is inappropriate for one My noble friend might also like to note that Clause 6, sovereign state to seek such a commitment from another which was new Clause 17 on Report in the other place, sovereign country or territory.Moreover, the EU would was an amendment tabled by Dr Phillip Lee, the not offer the UK such a binding commitment because Conservative Member for Bracknell. the EU’sown trade agreements are a matter for negotiation between the EU and its third countries. For this reason, Baroness Fairhead: I thank my noble friend for that the objective of this amendment would be an empty clarification. I should have said that it was not a one for the Government. Furthermore, if the EU chose government amendment. But I take the point. to recognise the UK content, it would be for the EU to I meant to respond to that question. We are trying choose how to implement that with its trading partners. to do whatever we can to provide help to SMEs and I come again to the point from the noble Baroness, other organisations to help trade. That includes working Lady Kramer,on the cost of certifications and certification with them on procedures and practices which will of origin. The certificates of origin used to export to reduce the cost of, and barriers to, trade. I confirm each partner country will be the same as they are now. that we are actively engaging with the chambers. If it is Businesses will use those certificates as they currently not on this particular point, I will take that back to the do. For UK-EU trade, the UK is proposing no routine department and make sure that we include this too. rules of origin, so no additional burden will be placed on business. That of course will be for negotiation Lord Stevenson of Balmacara (Lab): My Lords, with the EU. I am grateful to my noble friend Lord Lilley, what is now Clause 6 was an amendment introduced first, for his expertise on this matter, but also for by a Conservative Back-Bencher in the other place. pointing out the report—which I confess I had not Did I hear the Minister correctly when she said that it read either—on the costs of compliance. was still the Government’s contemplation that this might be amendable? I point out to her, in case she is in any doubt, that this would require a government Baroness Kramer: May I ask something? I do not amendment, which I have not seen on the Marshalled know the answer to this question. We are talking List so far. Is she saying that this is something they are about a no-deal scenario here, obviously. Under WTO actively considering for Report? rules, if the UK says that it will import from the EU without any requirement for rules of origin, is it Baroness Fairhead: The Government do not endorse required to extend that same preferential treatment—not the wording of the amendment, and consider that the just a tariff preference but preferential treatment—to wording has legal and technical difficulties, so we are other countries outside the EU? I thought that was reflecting on what should be done. embedded in the WTO regime, but I could be wrong. Lord McNicol of West Kilbride: I thank the Minister Baroness Fairhead: My understanding is that, because for her response, and the noble Lords, Lord Purvis of it would be part of an overall agreement with the EU, Tweed and Lord Lansley, and the noble Baroness, it would therefore be a trade agreement under WTO Lady McIntosh of Pickering, for their contributions terms and the same rules that apply to any other FTA and kind words. This is an important amendment, as would apply. Therefore, that would be accepted as one it looks to protect the current benefits of rules of of the terms. origin classification. As the noble Baroness, Lady Kramer, 1069 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1070 said, there are benefits for both the UK and our EU (vi) the International Convention on the Protection of partner countries, through cumulation and clarification the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of local goods. of Their Families, (vii) the International Convention for the Protection of A lot has been said, so I will read Hansard with All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, interest. I beg leave to withdraw Amendment 31. (viii) the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and Amendment 31 withdrawn. (ix) the Convention on the Rights of the Child; (f) the United Kingdom’s obligations on workers’ rights and labour standards as established by the United Amendment 32 Kingdom’s commitments under the International Labour Organisation’s fundamental conventions, Moved by Lord Stevenson of Balmacara including but not limited to the Declaration on Fundamental Rights at Work; 32: After Clause 5, insert the following new Clause— (g) obligations relating to animal sentience by which “Trade agreement impact assessments the United Kingdom is bound, or any principles (1) Before the end of the initial five year period after an relating to animal sentience to which the United international trade agreement has been implemented under Kingdom adheres, and any provision in domestic section 2 of this Act, the Secretary of State shall lay law (including retained EU law) relating to animal before both Houses of Parliament— welfare standards and the welfare of animals in the (a) an assessment of the qualitative and quantitative production of food; impact of the agreement on— (h) the principle of eliminating poverty; (i) the economy, broken down by the different parts of (i) the United Kingdom’s environmental obligations in the United Kingdom and different regions of international law and as established by, but not England, limited to— (ii) the environment, (i) the Paris Agreement adopted under the United (iii) human rights standards, Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, (iv) labour standards, and (ii) the Convention on International Trade in Endangered (v) individuals with protected characteristics under Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), and section 4 of the Equalities Act 2010, (iii) the Convention on Biological Diversity, including in the United Kingdom; and the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety; (b) an assessment of the qualitative and quantitative (j) offences under section 1 of the Modern Slavery impact of the proposed trade agreement on— Act 2015 (slavery, servitude and forced or compulsory labour); (i) the economy, (k) the sovereignty of Parliament; (ii) the environment, (l) the legal authority of UK courts; (iii) human rights standards, (m) the rule of law; and (iv) labour standards, and (n) the principle of equality before the law. (v) individuals with protected characteristics under section 4 of the Equalities Act 2010, (3) The Secretary of State must make arrangements for the assessment to be laid before the Scottish Parliament, the in any other state which is a proposed signatory to the National Assembly for Wales and the Northern Ireland agreement. Assembly. (2) Before the end of the initial five year period after an (4) In preparing the assessment under subsection (1), the international trade agreement has been implemented under Secretary of State shall consult— section 2 of this Act, the Secretary of State shall lay before both Houses of Parliament an assessment of the (a) the Scottish Ministers, the First Minister or the extent to which the provisions of the agreement conflict Lord Advocate, with, or are consistent with— (b) the Welsh Ministers, and (a) the provisions of international treaties ratified by (c) a Northern Ireland devolved authority.” the United Kingdom; (b) the provisions of the Sustainable Development Goals adopted by the United Nations General Lord Stevenson of Balmacara: My Lords, we move Assembly on 25 September 2015; from future prospects and problems around definitions (c) the provisions of the United Nations Guiding and what other partners will do to a matter which will Principles on Business and Human Rights; lie very much in the hands of the Government as we (d) domestic human rights law; go forward. As and when trade agreements become (e) international human rights law and international the responsibility of this Parliament, there need to be humanitarian law, including but not limited to— procedures for establishing how and on what basis (i) the International Convention on the Elimination of these are agreed, but also, as is the subject of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, Amendment 32, for reviewing our progress in carrying (ii) the International Covenant on Civil and Political these forward. Rights, The amendment is rather full. It contains a long list (iii) the International Covenant on Economic, Social of issues so it is perhaps not a probing amendment, and Cultural Rights, but I hope the Minister will accept that we would be (iv) the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of open to further discussion on the wording. It is meant Discrimination against Women, to set out broadly all the issues that we think need to (v) the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, come into play on this issue but the detail itself could Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, be subject to discussion. 1071 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1072

[LORD STEVENSON OF BALMACARA] I pray in aid a precedent that the noble Lord, I hope all Members of the Committee will agree Lord Stevenson, will remember well: the report on that we need to have a system under which we have innovation and economic growth provided for under confidence that any trade negotiations taking place on the Intellectual Property Act 2014. I believe that was behalf of the people of this country are subject to the result of an amendment that he tabled during the effective periodic review of the issues involved, what passage of that Act. As a Minister, I found the process the process will be and how many dimensions are of producing the report every year very helpful, as did involved in the consultations and engagement with the the Intellectual Property Office.In fact, its CEO confirmed devolved Assemblies and Parliaments, as well as the that to me only last week. involvement of those affected by the negotiations, I have some doubts about the wisdom of setting up such as consumers, those who work in the industries a special compliance monitoring agency, as proposed concerned and the companies themselves. in Amendment 81, which is also in this group. It seems Of course, there is an issue about what impact these a big stick, given the Bill’s scope. However, on a trade agreements will have regionally, not just across separate point, compliance would appear to be in the the national regions but within England in particular, purview of a general review of effectiveness. I have with variations that will need to be picked up. We need provided for such a review to be laid before the devolved to make sure that Parliament, in assessing how these Parliaments,to which the noble Lord attached importance, trade deals are done, has access to all the information because I believe this would be a good way to keep them that is required. up to date, ensuring that the reviewers, looking back, The whole process is set out in Amendment 32. think about their interests as well as English and UK Amendment 81, in the name of my noble friend interests. Such a review would also cover SMEs, which Lord McNicol—he did so well with his previous we discussed in another long debate last week. I look amendment that we have given him the afternoon off forward to hearing from my noble friend the Minister. to recover, so I am speaking for him on this amendment; we are working together, of course, as noble Lords 5 pm would expect—sets out in more detail the question of independence for the responsible body. There are many Lord Purvis of Tweed: My Lords, I have great candidates for that. We do not need to go into it, but it sympathy with Amendment 81 in the noble Lord’s is important that there is separation between those name. It struck me, as a former Member of the Scottish who set up and agree trade agreements and those who Parliament, that one result of our leaving the European review them for the benefit of the public interest. Union will be that we have, in effect, a single market within the United Kingdom, while,for the implementation This issue can be developed across various activities. of trade agreements, some elements of those agreements I think there will be contributions from those who will be under the auspices of the devolved Administrations. will wish to see more stress placed on the social rather Therefore, if it comes to compliance, the body that has than the economic issues. The Government are entered into the agreement with the third country will involved in international treaties that will come into be the United Kingdom if the United Kingdom play on this. There is a great deal to be said about how Government are also a regulatory body to the devolved you would do this, with what process and everything Administrations for areas for which they have executive else. The amendment attempts to set that up. I beg to and legislative competence. That is potentially an move. uncomfortable situation. There is merit, therefore, in considering how the United Kingdom might have, in Baroness Neville-Rolfe (Con): My Lords, I shall effect, the equivalent of the European Commission. speak to Amendment 64 in my name in this group. I What will be the bodies that operate across the United also welcome the noble Lord, Lord McNicol of West Kingdom that will consider compliance with trade Kilbride, to the joys of tabling amendments. They agreements? It sits uncomfortably if the UK Government provide the ability to lead scrutiny and discussion of are that body when it comes to the component parts of significance in a very freewheeling way. I was also the UK that have both ministerial and legislative going to say “succinct”, except that the previous group, competence for those. on rules of origin, took nearly an hour. Turning to my Amendments 52 and 60, one of the My amendment is inspired by Amendment 32, which issues concerning what the Government call continuity was just moved by the noble Lord, Lord Stevenson. agreements, which they are seeking, is that they might However, having studied other amendments to the not just be temporary rollover agreements: they might Bill and the Government’s reaction to them, I have last a long time. They will be treaties in their own right opted for a simpler formula in the hope that this which, by definition, will be permanent, but the regulations might attract support across the Committee. It that come with them to translate them for ratification provides for a review, after five years, by the Secretary could well be permanent or, at the very least, operate of State of the impact and effectiveness of each for three-year terms, which could be indefinite if they international trade agreement under Clause 2, but are renewed. On the point that the noble Baroness, it deliberately omits the long list of criteria in Lady Neville-Rolfe, made about a five-year period, the Amendment 32. That is because I believe in simplicity. option I have put forward is that, in advance of I do not believe we should lay down detailed areas that Parliament being asked at the end of the initial three the review should cover, worthy though they may be. years about the impact on the United Kingdom, before As we know, policy priorities change over time and the decisions have been taken on whether they should be review should be conducted from a contemporary renewed or whether the Government might seek to go perspective. back and consider the contents of those agreements, 1073 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1074 that is the appropriate time for reporting to be carried of Amendment 32, in the name of my noble friend out. Therefore, it is important at that stage, in advance Lord Stevenson, which requires the Government to of the end of the initial three-year period, that a lay before Parliament a qualitative and quantitative review is carried out of the impact on the UK and assessment, after five years, of the impact of new specifically on the nations and regions. We know from international trade agreements on human rights standards both Governments’data, information from the devolved and people with protected characteristics under domestic Administrations and academic research that trade deals equality law, among other things. It also provides with countries that have a particular bias in certain transparency on the impact of such agreements on sectors affect some parts of the United Kingdom fundamental rights. As far as I can tell, the UK more than others, whether car manufacturing in the Government are a party to all the bodies mentioned in north-east of England or food and drink in Scotland. this amendment, so this should not be an issue and Therefore it is very important to specifically mention there should be no question about it. I should like the nations and regions. some assurance from the Minister that, over the next It is also important, as suggested in subsection (2) five years, we will comply with all these international of my proposed new clause in Amendment 52, that we treaties on human rights and equalities. have a means by which we can test what has been said I agree with noble Lords who said that compliance repeatedly—that we could trade with those countries with equalities has to be judged by an independent better if we were not part of the single market than if body—I certainly know that. It should not be judged we had continued to be part of it. by the Government themselves. I thank the Equality Amendment 60 looks forward to any proposed and Human Rights Commission for its briefing on future trading relationship between the UK and the this subject. Its concern is that we, EU and its impact on the British economy. I hope that “retain the UK’s equality and human rights legal framework as the Government will be sympathetic to this amendment we leave the EU”, because it has already been agreed in principle to and we ensure that, publish modelling of what the impacts on the British “the UK remains a global leader on equality and human rights”, economy would be for some of these areas, even after we leave the European Union. That is consistent if—and this is the most charitable way of describing with the UK being an open and fair place to live and it—the Government had to be persuaded to publish do business. Certainly, if the Government do not this information rather than allowing MPs to enter a accept the length of this amendment, I hope that they darkened room to study it in private. Now that this will accept the spirit of it, and that that will be information is out in the public domain and the principle expressed at the next stage of the Bill. is there, economic modelling of the impact of our relationship with the EU, depending on the way forward and the options taken on that trading relationship that Baroness Hooper (Con): My Lords, I also have are to be negotiated, is very important. After last sympathy with the concept of impact assessments. night’s vote in the House of Commons, it is even more After all, they will apply equally to rollover agreements important, given that whatever alternative arrangements and future trade agreements, so it is perfectly appropriate are considered which have an impact on our future to raise this issue and discuss it at this stage of the Bill. trading relationship, we will need to know what kind I also agree that it is important to have an independent of impact they will have on the British economy and body and not the Government themselves as a monitoring its different parts. body, and that there should be arrangements to cover Regardless of that, it is necessary now for us to all parts of the United Kingdom equally and fairly. I consider what architecture we put in place to consider am persuaded by the argument for simplicity in all the impact of our trading relationships with countries this; therefore, I support my noble friend Lady Neville- around the world on the different parts of the United Rolfe’s amendment in particular. There is a danger in Kingdom and then on the United Kingdom as a making lists, because they can become out of date. whole. It will be even more important given that the European Union has been and will continue to be our Lord Lilley: My Lords, the amendment tabled by biggest trading partner, so that we do not repeat the the noble Lord, Lord Stevenson of Balmacara, and process we have had over the last two years and try to others of the same gist are remarkable. In my 35 years reverse engineer what the likely impact will be. We are in Parliament, I do not recall Parliament ever having starting to establish some of that framework now, subjected any trade agreement negotiated by the European which is why Amendment 60 has been tabled. I hope Union to the level of scrutiny which it is proposed that that the Government will be sympathetic to it. If it is future trade agreements negotiated by ourselves should not accepted in this precise language, I hope that the be subjected. This is remarkable evidence that the Minister may be able to present in some form of Opposition are converted to the merits of having an language that there will be consideration of the architecture independent trade policy because it will mean that we of how we look at the economic impact across the UK can influence it and work it to our own advantage. Of of the future relationship with our biggest trading course, that would not be the case if we had a customs partner. union-type arrangement similar to Turkey. Turkey does not participate at all in the negotiation of European Baroness Thornton (Lab): My Lords, I will intervene free trade agreements with others, but is simply a pawn on the Bill, which is not my normal territory, although in those agreements. We would be too, if we were in a I have 20 years’ experience of working on equalities customs arrangement with Europe but not part of issues in your Lordships’ House. I will speak in support Europe—in other words, if the policy of the noble 1075 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1076

[LORD LILLEY] 5.15 pm Lord’s party were to become effective, as I am sure he We are now considering our own treaty negotiations would agree—and those sorts of assessments would but no obligation to inform or consult Parliament. become irrelevant. Parliament has no formal role, structures or procedures More substantively, in the past when I was involved for scrutinising treaties, does not have to debate, vote in negotiating the Uruguay round, for example, one on or approve treaties and has limited and, as yet, thing that disturbed me was the difficulty of becoming unused power to delayratification. This is really dangerous. accountable to the House—then the House of EU trade agreements require the consent of the European Commons—for what I was doing. It is quite difficult Parliament and, in some cases—what are called mixed for Ministers to be accountable for something that agreements—ratification by member states. We are they are negotiating, because they can always come talking about our trade with the European Union back and say, “We got the best possible deal. If it which, whichever way you look at it—the noble Lord, hadn’t been for my brilliant negotiation, it would be Lord Lilley, said that trade outside the European even worse”. It is very hard for the House to respond Union is increasing at exponential rates—makes up to that. That left me feeling uneasy. If we can find a almost 50% of our trade. way to ensure that negotiations are properly reported, On top of that are countries that account for 17% or assessed and held accountable to the House, that is a 18% of our trade. That is a list of, whichever which good thing. One of the bad consequences of them not way you count them, more than 50 countries around being accountable is that officials did not take the job the world from Albania to Ukraine, including Morocco of being accountable to Parliament at all seriously. and Egypt. We have European Union free trade They felt they were accountable to the international agreements with those countries. In total, that makes organisations with which they were negotiating. One up two-thirds of our trade, but we are living under the needs to be worried about that and it is why it is magical illusion that if we give the Government the important that we have accountability. If Parliament power to negotiate and roll over all those agreements, holds Ministers accountable, officials will be responsive many of which have taken many years—the Canadian to Ministers and to what the House wants—not to agreement took eight years—we as one country of what international organisations and their peers in 65 million people will try to negotiate on the same other organisations want. basis as the largest trading bloc in the world of 500 million That is not a party-political point. When I made people. We expect countries to just roll those agreements that point in the Commons, my Labour opposite over. number came up and said it was exactly the sort of I ask the Minister: how many countries have agreed, thing she experienced, not in trade matters but in at the stroke of midnight, to roll over those agreements? other matters. Where she was not responsible to the It is utter nonsense. They will renegotiate with us House, officials did not take that responsibility seriously. full-time and it will take a long time. For our proportion The noble Lord and his colleagues are on to something of trade with the European Union to decrease will important with their approach, which I prefer to the take a long time. simplicity of the approach of my noble friend Lady Neville-Rolfe. When we have our independent I congratulate the noble Lord, Lord McNicol, on trade policy, it will be important to find ways to hold his first appearance at the Dispatch Box. Amendment 32, Ministers to account. tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Stevenson, includes in its proposed new subsection (2)(k) “the sovereignty of Parliament”. That is what we are talking about here. Lord Bilimoria (CB): My Lords, these amendments The noble Baroness, Lady Neville-Rolfe, mentions in strike at the heart of the issue, because the Bill contains her Amendment 64 trade agreement impact assessments no provision for greater parliamentary involvement in at the end of a five-year period: trade agreements. Parliament’s role in UK treaties is “the impact and effectiveness of each international trade agreement much more limited than the democratic scrutiny given implemented”. to EU trade agreements. It has no formal role in negotiations, does not have to debate, vote on or Amendment 31, tabled by the noble Lord, approve them. I follow on from what the noble Lord, Lord McNicol, suggests a new agency for compliance Lord Lilley, said: for EU trade agreements, the Council monitoring. All this is about giving Parliament more gives the European Commission a mandate to negotiate of a say—more power over the Government, rather on behalf of member states and authorises the signature than their having unfettered rights to do these trade and conclusion of agreements. The European Parliament deals. This is the problem with Brexit: the Henry VIII does not take part in the negotiations but is kept fully powers in Bills that we have already debated, where informed at all stages, questions the Commission and the Government have power to just push through can issue non-binding but politically important resolutions. legislation without going through the normal stages, The European Parliament’s consent is usually required which are so thorough, in both Houses. Now they are before trade agreements can be concluded. National trying to do the same thing with trade agreements. parliaments also scrutinise EU trade negotiations through Of the UK’s 10 biggest trading partners, seven are their own EU scrutiny processes. In the UK, draft from the EU and eight are from Europe. Under the Council decisions on signing, provisionally applying gravity model, there are two variables: the distance or concluding an agreement are deposited and scrutinised between two countries and the size of their economies. by the EU scrutiny committees in both Houses, and There is no surprise that we do a lot of our trade with may be debated on the Floor of the House or in the European Union. Yes, China’s trade is increasing, committee. but the gravity rule means that it will take time for it to 1077 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1078 come anywhere close to the trade we do with the case—that, if we wanted to dig through the numbers European Union. Look at it historically, before we and find something close to the May deal, we had to joined the EEC; look at the decline in EU trade as a choose a set of numbers called “modelled White Paper proportion of our trade and the increase of other with 50% non-tariff barrier sensitivity”. We were told trade. Whichever way you look at it, the EU 15 or that would give us better numbers, and they were dire 20 years from now will be at least 40% of our trade. compared to the numbers that were in the charts for The Commonwealth countries in total make up less the Chequers deal. I never want to see a Chancellor of than 10% of our trade. That includes India, Australia, the Exchequer—I fully believe it was inadvertent—quoting New Zealand and Canada. and talking to the British public about a set of outcomes What are we asking for? We ask for the right of which his own document counters significantly. Parliament to set a thorough mandate to govern each It seems to me that, if the Government were to trade negotiation, the right of the public to be consulted undertake to provide us with accurate figures or their as part of setting that mandate, transparency in the best estimate of an accurate forecast, that would be negotiations, and the right of Parliament to amend exceedingly helpful for the complicated discussions we and reject trade deals. Other developed countries are involved in. It would be helpful, even today, to incorporate manyof those elements into their negotiations. have the figures for the May deal, never mind the May In the US, our biggest single trading partner, the deal as it is to be adjusted. I am really quite shocked US Government must undertake meaningful public that, having known they handed us wrong numbers in consultation before negotiating, release all negotiating November,the Government have not given us reasonable text to a large representative panel and subject deals to and rational numbers now. an affirmative vote by Congress. Congress is also entitled to amend deals unless it waives that right. Baroness Fairhead: My Lords, I thank the noble What are we doing sitting back and allowing the Lords, Lord Stevenson and Lord Purvis, for tabling Government to take control? Parliament and the people Amendments 32 and 52. I note the noble Lord’s of this country need to take back control. statement that we should not focus too much on specific wording. I am very taken by the suggestion of Baroness Kramer: My Lords, I thank the noble my noble friends Lady Cooper and Lady Neville-Rolfe Lord, Lord Bilimoria, as he has said a great deal of that simplicity is a good approach, but I would welcome what I was going to say, and I am not going to repeat any conversations about specific wording. it. I would underscore, to the Minister, the general As the House is aware, we are seeking continuity as frustration at this point in time of knowing that we, far as the existing EU trade agreements are concerned. the UK Parliament, know far less about the negotiations This means the existing impact assessments of the that are proceeding with these rollover and continuity existing trade agreements that the EU is in will continue agreements than we would have known had we been in to be relevant. They have already enabled Members of the European Parliament and this was a trade deal both Houses, as well as the public, to consider the that was being negotiated by the EU. We would have impact to the UK. There is an impact assessment, for been far more informed, consulted and engaged. That example, of the EU’s free trade agreement with South loss of democratic input is exceedingly frustrating. Korea. It is online, and it has been available since This is not a terribly good sign for the future. I hope February 2010, alongside many others that are also very much that, having decided secrecy is the way available online. forward for these continuity arrangements, the As for a broader evaluation of policy,the Government Government change their mind before they go on to also undertake evaluations of the impact of their any new arrangements. policies as a matter of course. In addition, I am happy Amendment 60, in the name of my noble friend to confirm that we are developing proposals for how Lord Purvis, would insert a new clause, “Additional monitoring and evaluation can best be conducted review of the impact of the proposed future trading when the UK takes responsibility for our own trade relationship with the EU on the United Kingdom policy. I would be happy to meet noble Lords to economy”. Another general frustration is that, at this reflect their views, and I take to heart my noble friend point in time, we still do not have the Government’s Lady Neville-Rolfe’s suggestion of a contemporary assessment and analysis of the impact of the deal that approach. Theresa May has negotiated—never mind the one that Further, the Government have already committed, she may negotiate—on the future economy of the UK. through Clauses 3 and 5 of the Trade Bill, to lay in If noble Lords will remember, in November the Parliament a series of reports explaining our approach Government published EU Exit: Long-term Economic to delivering continuity in each of our existing trade Analysis, which modelled a number of scenarios including agreements. They will also explain, if any, significant the Chequers deal, but did not actually model the deal changes to and the economic impact on the new UK that was on the table. I am sure it was inadvertent—I bilateral agreement when compared to the existing said it on the day—but the Chancellor, when speaking impact assessment. We believe that this is proportionate on various media outlets, therefore quoted the economic and better suits this unique programme, which seeks consequences that came from an analysis of the Chequers to preserve existing benefits rather than establish new deal, not from an analysis of the deal that Mrs May ones. In the earlier debate before Committee, we made had then staked as her option and choice. The numbers a firm commitment to bring forward proposals on our were starkly wrong as a consequence. All of us had future trading relationships. We have been clear: we advice from various different institutions—I cannot will ensure that Parliament plays an appropriate role remember whether it was the IFS in this particular when the UK has its own independent trade policy. 1079 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1080

[BARONESS FAIRHEAD] confirming that any impact assessments published at I am not trying to avoid the questions of my noble the time the agreements we are transitioning came into friend Lord Lilley and the noble Lord, Lord Bilimoria, force remain valid. On the international agreements about future parliamentary scrutiny. On the Floor of referenced by my noble friend, I can confirm that we the House, I have been clear that we will bring forward have not changed our commitment to them. The process proposals because we understand fully how critical of exiting the EU will not alter the UK’s commitment proper parliamentary scrutiny is. I have stated, and am to upholding either international laws or our international happy to restate, that I am open to suggestions. We are commitments. These include commitments on climate looking at the suggestions of the ITC in the other change and the sustainable development goals. place and waiting for input from the Constitution The noble Baroness, Lady Thornton, and my noble Committee. This issue will be covered in much more friend Lady Hooper both raised issues in a number of detail by my noble friend Lord Younger in the debate areas such as human rights, labour and environmental on the next group of amendments, so with the leave of standards around the world. In an earlier debate in noble Lords I will leave that to him. Committee we confirmed that we will proudly continue On Amendment 60, tabled by the noble Lord, to comply with those international obligations. In Lord Purvis, the Government have met their commitment response to the comment of the noble Baroness, to provide Parliament with a robust and extensive Lady Thornton, on monitoring by independent bodies, analysis of the long-term economic impact of our I can confirm that that too will continue. future trading relationship with the EU. As I understand I turn now to Amendment 81, tabled by the noble it—we can discuss this if I am incorrect—the amendment Lord, Lord McNicol. Let me be clear that the Government asks for a short-term analysis.However,as the Chancellor will continue to ensure that Parliament and the devolved said in his letter in reply to the Treasury Committee, Administrations play a crucial role in the scrutiny of the cross-government group is not suited to provide the UK’s trade agreements. We are in discussions at analysis of short-term impacts. Within their statutory both official and ministerial level on this. mandates, the Bank of England and the OBR produce Specifically in relation to compliance, I must stress short to medium-term forecasts for the UK economy. that the UK will not bring into force any international The Bank of England has already provided the Treasury agreement without first ensuring that it is fully compliant Committee with its analysis of short-term impacts with its obligations. Where we are transitioning existing and the OBR will continue to update its forecast in ratified EU trade agreements, we have been complying line with its mandate. with those agreements as a member of the EU. We are The amendment also asks for the economic impacts working hard to ensure that we continue to be compliant of the backstop to be modelled but, as the Chancellor after leaving the EU, for example by using the powers made clear, the backstop is an insurance policy that in the European Union (Withdrawal) Act to make UK neither side wishes to use and, if triggered, would be law operable without reliance on the European explicitly temporary. Furthermore, there is not yet Communities Act 1972. Any secondary legislation sufficient specificity on detailed arrangements for necessary to ensure that we are in compliance will be modelling purposes. This would be a matter for further made before ratification, following the usual parliamentary discussions through the joint committee; without such processes. This means that we will start from a point of detail, the Government would not be able to model its being in compliance with our agreements. We would impacts meaningfully. Ahead of further discussions expect the same of our international partners. This is on those arrangements, Ministers have a responsibility simply what is required when it comes to making not to release information that could reveal or imply international treaties. potential negotiating positions. Normally within trade agreements there are mechanisms for monitoring and reviewing the agreement Lord Hannay of Chiswick (CB): I am sorry, but the through bodies such as joint committees. This applies Minister has rather shocked me by saying that she will both to our compliance and the compliance of our not handle the next amendment. It is probably the partner countries. We will of course look to replicate most important amendment we will discuss, concerning the functions of these existing mechanisms. The noble negotiation mandates and so on. The Minister gave an Lord, Lord Purvis, mentioned that we should make answer on the Government’s thinking that her noble sure that we reflect the regions and the devolved friend will, I am afraid, find inadequate if he repeats Administrations. Again, I am happy to meet with him it. I assume she is aware that this House has said that to discuss how that can be done. We will operate the the Report stage will not proceed until the Government mechanisms according to the terms specified in the have tabled amendments on this matter. Can she confirm relevant agreement. These will of course differ by that that is the Government’s understanding? agreement, but we will be accountable for compliance overall. I hope that this reassures the Committee, and 5.30 pm I would ask the noble Lord to withdraw his amendment. Baroness Fairhead: I am happy to confirm that. I turn to Amendment 64. Trade continuity agreements, Lord Stevenson of Balmacara: My Lords, it is pretty which Clause 2 would be used to implement, simply much an open secret that amendments of the type we continue the effects of existing EU trade agreements. have just spoken to are usually tabled by Oppositions Many of the benefits are already being reaped by UK when they have very little to say about a topic. Youcall businesses. I hope that my noble friend can take comfort for a review and that usually ties up the civil servants from my reassurance in my responses to Amendments 32 for days trying to work out what that is supposed to and 52, and I would like to reassure her further by do. It gets the Minister into a knot and allows you to 1081 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1082 have a relatively easy passage, especially if the Bill is a (4) Before either House of Parliament may approve by bit boring at that particular point. That is not what resolution the text of a proposed trade agreement in has happened today, and indeed we have been reminded accordance with the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010, the Secretary of State must lay the text of the that it has worked in the past. I recall the discussion proposed agreement before the Committee and that text during the passage of the Intellectual Property Act must be approved by a resolution of that Committee. and it has worked out well. (5) Prior to considering a resolution approving the text of a There is a case here for thinking really hard about free trade agreement under subsection (4), the Committee what we want to see happen as a review. I accept must produce a report setting out a recommendation in absolutely that my amendment is ridiculously overspecified relation to the ratification of the agreement. and gold-plated. I am happy to learn from noble (6) The Secretary of State must lay the report produced Lords who have served as Ministers and those who under subsection (5) before both Houses of Parliament. have experience of this on the other side. We could (7) Schedule (Committee on Trade Agreements) contains probably with advantage put together quite a sensible, further provision about the Committee. minimalised amendment which would cover the ground. (8) In this section, “free trade agreement” refers to any The Minister spoke about wanting to meet to discuss agreement between the United Kingdom and one or this; that would be worth while. If we can get sensibility, more partners that includes components that facilitate the trade of goods, services or intellectual property including scale and scope in a reasonable approach, we can but not limited to— make some progress here. (a) Free Trade Agreements (FTA); I do not think this can just be left to the passage of (b) Interim Association Agreements, Association time. It is true that the Bill as currently drafted has Agreements (AA); considerations of reviews, but these were late additions and are not well drafted. We have already (c) Economic Partnership Agreements (EPA); noted earlier in Committee that while Clauses 3 and 5 (d) Interim Partnership Agreements; make provision for reports to be provided, Clause 4 (e) Stabilisation and Association Agreements (SAA); provides an opportunity for Ministers to duck out of (f) Global Agreements (GA); that; and they deal with the process of agreement, not (g) Economic Area Agreements (EAA); of review. I therefore think there is a bit of a lacuna (h) Cooperation Agreements (CA); here in the Government’s approach. We may be able to (i) Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreements resolve it by statements in the House, but there may be (CETA); a case for having at least something in the Bill to (j) Association Agreements with strong trade component; cover it. (k) Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnerships Other points were made in this very rich debate. I (TTIP); do not think we need to look too hard—I was going (l) Investment Protection Agreements.” say to the noble Lord, Lord Lilley, but he is not in his place. The EU model, although it exists and operates, Lord Stevenson of Balmacara: My Lords, in moving is not perfect, and there is already much documentation Amendment 33 I will introduce some of the discussion on how it needs to be improved if it is to be effective. topics raised by the other amendments in this area. I The question of independence is not dealt with in the look forward to the response from the noble Viscount, current drafting of the Bill. I think there is a sense Lord Younger, who is standing in on this issue. The around the Committee of a coming together on this subject of the amendment is, as previously described issue. We should take advantage of that—a meeting by the noble Lord, Lord Hannay, a key—probably the would be very useful—and I look forward to being most important—part of the Bill. I take his advice and able to make some progress on this in a relatively easy am happy to try to man up and make sure that I way. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. establish the case in the sorts of terms he would like to see. We have also had contributions from the noble Amendment 32 withdrawn. Lords, Lord Lilley and Lord Bilimoria, and the noble Baroness, Lady Kramer, which have set out some of Amendment 33 the scene, so I do not think we need to go right down Moved by Lord Stevenson of Balmacara to the very basics of it. I would like to focus on some 33: After Clause 5, insert the following new Clause— of the principles that are important in trying to assess this issue. “Establishment of Committee on Trade Agreements We are talking here about how Parliament and (1) A body corporate called the Committee on Trade Agreements is to be established consisting of nine members who are wider civil society get engaged with a process that we to be drawn both from the members of the House of in this country have not really had much direct involvement Commons and from the members of the House of Lords with since 1972 because the function we are talking in accordance with the provisions in Schedule (Committee about—trade—has been a sole competence of the EU. on Trade Agreements). Yes, there have been occasions when issues have come (2) Negotiations towards a free trade agreement may not back but, as we heard in earlier discussions, they have commence until the Secretary of State has laid a draft not been very detailed and there has not been proper negotiating mandate before the Committee and it has scrutiny. I think there is a general feeling that the been approved by a resolution of that Committee. procedures set out in the CRaG Act 2010 do not now (3) Prior to considering a resolution approving a mandate satisfy those with an interest in this area. relating to the negotiation of a free trade agreement, the Committee must produce a sustainability impact assessment I have eight principles that I think should inform in accordance with the provisions in Schedule (Committee our discussion. These are: how do the Government on Trade Agreements). intend to ensure that formal consultation with external 1083 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1084

[LORD STEVENSON OF BALMACARA] last night, we would have time to look at this. However, stakeholders, in advance of any negotiation mandate if no deal remains on the table—and the Prime Minister being drawn up, is exercised? How do the Government has said that it does—we have to realise that the Bill intend to ensure proper transparency of trade negotiations we are now discussing may be operational in 60 days’ and negotiating mandates, and what role will Parliament time on 30 March this year. As currently drafted, play in that process? How do the Government intend the Bill says nothing about approving mandates to ensure maximum transparency in advance of those before the Government can negotiate on trade with a consultations? Obviously, they are constrained to some particular country. That is a lacuna which cannot be extent by issues that would be regarded as necessary to left unfilled. be taken under some level of secrecy if they involved When he replies, I would like the noble Viscount the security or other issues, but how will that transparency Minister to repeat what the noble Baroness the Minister happen? In particular, how will the Government prepare said: that the Government will table amendments before proper impact assessments and make these available Report and explain how they believe that Parliament’s to inform the debate? authority should be established in the context of an There is a general question about reviewing reporting independent trade policy. I agree that it may not be on trade agreements after a specified time period, but needed on 30 March and we would be mad to leave also in relation to progress—we touched on this earlier, without a deal on 29 March. But the Government but it is part of a principle that we need to build in have decided to go on saying that we may and therefore from the beginning. How do the Government intend we had better be prepared. I hope the noble Viscount to ensure that parliamentarians are able to access the will deal with that point as soon as he starts his negotiating texts? Without knowledge of the texts, response. very little scrutiny can take place. Some texts will be The substantive issue at stake relates to the very sensitive, but nevertheless it is important that provisions—or lack of them—for parliamentary there is a mechanism under which they can be reviewed mandating and oversight of all negotiations with third and discussed. countries once we are able to conduct them on our What will be the formal process or procedure for own. They are important because without them, if the the ratification of trade agreements? The current Bill remains as it is currently drafted, together with the arrangements under CRaG are not satisfactory. What provisions for the approval of international agreements, will be the formal procedures for changes that need to the only say that Parliament will have will be after the be brought forward—not new trade agreements but Government have conducted and concluded negotiations how, particularly in light of the need for broader and then put before Parliament an up or down, yes or discussion and debate, we amend and change agreements no agreement to what is in them. That is what we call found to be deficient, unfair or working badly in in this House, when we are talking about statutory relation to any aspect of our economy or our part of instruments, the nuclear option. It would be absurd if the country? we went into the conduct of an independent trade Those are the issues the amendment seeks to open policy with nothing for Parliament except the nuclear up. Again, it is gold-plated—I accept that—but it is option. What does the nuclear option mean if it is ever important that we see the full range and depth of the deployed? It means that the Government would in issues raised and I hope to have a good debate around good faith have negotiated with a third country—reached that. I beg to move. agreement with it, settled all the tariff details and the non-tariff barriers—and then the deal gets rejected. Lord Hannay of Chiswick: I support Amendment 33, How much negotiating credibility would we have left about which a great deal was said in the debate on the after that? Zero. previous amendment, although some of the contributions more properly belonged to the discussion of this 5.45 pm amendment. I have no hesitation whatever in suggesting I agree that what is being suggested—devising proper that this is probably the single most important article provisions to provide mandating and oversight—is in this legislation—except that it is not there, of course, not rocket science but it requires a fairly delicate at the moment, but it needs to be there. touch, partly because this Parliament has never fulfilled Why is it so important? It is because until now the that function before. It is not all that difficult. The EU British Parliament has had no clear role in giving has structures that do precisely that. I tend to agree mandates or setting out the broad lines under which with the noble Lord, Lord Stevenson, that the template the Government should negotiate trade agreements, of the European Union’s structures is not quite right nor has it had any proper system for oversight of for this Parliament but it shows that it can be done and them. Possibly that did not matter in the far distant how it can done, if that is what you want to do. It days before we joined the European Union, but it shows how the Council, composed of elected certainly matters now when free trade and other trade representatives of the member states, has to mandate deals are, as the Government have said again and any negotiations before they start. It shows how it again, at the heart of their Brexit strategy. Britain’s provides oversight. It deals with how it endorses ability to negotiate on its own on trade is at the heart negotiations when they have been concluded. It is of the Government’s pleading to back their deal. probably quite a good place to start for the Government This is really urgent now because the Government when they devise—as I hope they will—these provisions. have made it urgent by refusing to take no deal off the There is also a strong role now for the European table. If they took no deal off the table, as the Spelman Parliament, which is part of the mandating, approval amendment passed by the House of Commons did and oversight processes. It is not impossible to do. The 1085 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1086

European Union has conducted some extremely successful for our future trade agreement with the EU to avoid negotiations under these oversight and monitoring a repeat of the “running down the clock” situation. provisions. Take, for example, the agreement on Japan, Therefore, it is right that we have this put in place which is about to enter into force—not a small matter now. when you are talking about the largest and fourth-largest Amendments 71 to 74 are perhaps the core of that economies of the world agreeing on free trade. It has element and have formed part of the discussions so far been conducted very successfully.The Parliament has had about the role of Parliament going forward. In a its say, the Council has had its say and it has worked. I moment I will come to a live case study of a continuity hope the Government will give very careful thought to agreement to show that this is not just about the future all that. policy but is relevant now. Fundamentally, the reason I can see—and I think this was raised in the discussion that Parliaments around the world—the elected bodies we had before we committed the Bill—that there is a other than simply the Executives—are now involved at real worry about confidentiality. How do you ensure early stages of trade negotiations is that trade negotiations that the mandating, oversight and so on do not involve are now markedly different from how they were 30 or damage to the Government’s negotiating position? 40 years ago. That is not rocket science either. We have a Joint Committee that deals with intelligence and security By definition, the European Union now enters into and there are no leaks from that that I know of—none discussions on deep and comprehensive trade agreements. that have been damaging to the national interest anyway. In the past, the agreements were primarily about I am sure we can devise a system that has those tariff rates and little else, but now trade agreements characteristics and is secure from leaks. take into consideration the impact on domestic law of environmental standards. The social, economic, I do not know whether the exact formula that the environmental, gender,human rights,labour,development noble Lord has put forward in his amendment will be and regional impacts are all core components. If you the right one. I am sure there are different ways of look at the most recent trade negotiations that the doing this. It is for the Government to say how they European Union has carried out with British participation, want to do it but I ask them—please—not to quarrel whether it is with Singapore, Japan or Canada, they with whether they are going to do it. That will not be have included sections on the development and acceptable to this House. I hope they will not. I think sustainability goals. There are now clear positions we would be quite inadequately provided for if we do when it comes to human rights, labour development not have a system of this sort with a Joint Committee—or and the impact on local communities. These are core however it may be described—to do it. parts of the trade negotiations that we have embarked I therefore wait with interest to hear what the noble on, and that is why the United States, Australia and Viscount, Lord Younger, says in reply. I remind him the European Union have a much wider role for their again that without adequate and reasonably prompt Parliaments throughout the process. The Government’s positive reaction to the filling of this lacuna, this Bill is position is in stark contrast to that: we would simply going nowhere. It is as simple as that. That is what this use the existing treaty provisions, which are not only House voted for when we had the debate before the out of date but will prove ineffective. Bill was committed. I look forward to seeing some government amendments in the very near future. The only other aspect of ratification of treaties Although I support the amendment of the noble under the Constitutional Reform Act concerns what Lord, Lord Stevenson, he himself has said—very wisely, Mr Hollingbery,the Trade Minister,said in oral evidence I thought—that he did not think it was necessarily the to the International Trade Committee. He said that, final word in wisdom and that every detail did not although he did not want Parliament to have binding have to be as it was; this is something that the Government votes on these agreements, there was one aspect where have to provide. I hope that the noble Viscount will tell he thought that Parliament should have an overrule. us that that is what they are going to do. He might He said: even tell us when they are going to do it. I hope he will “But I do believe that Parliament should be able to opine upon also say that the coverage of it will be the coverage the outline approach”. here—mandating and oversight by both Houses of Parliament being able to opine on the outline approach Parliament. of trade negotiations might be a slightly unfortunate turn of phrase but the Government have given some Lord Purvis of Tweed: My Lords, I shall speak to indication that they are willing to consider it. I think Amendments 59 and 71 to 74. They are quite distinct. that on the previous group the Minister gave an indication Amendment 59 most certainly does not meet the of that kind, and I agree. We are looking forward to Hooper test of brevity but I can dispatch it fairly hearing the Government’s position on the amendments quickly—no doubt to the great relief of colleagues in to the Bill and to them giving a clear steer. the Committee—because it may be considered a In the spirit of assisting the Government, these continuity amendment. It replicates the need for a amendments in my name, with back-up from many meaningful vote process for the future relationship civil society organisations, suggest what I consider a with the EU as we go through the withdrawal agreement quadruple lock of parliamentary involvement from process. It need not be controversial but it provides for the outset in considering the sustainability impact so the necessity for Parliament to authorise the agreement. that there is a degree of transparency for all the It provides for that to be in primary legislation and different aspects that I mentioned earlier—the social, sets out the procedures should the Commons resolve economic, environmental, gender and human rights against the agreement. If we leave, this will be necessary impacts and so on. 1087 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1088

[LORD PURVIS OF TWEED] The 10th element of the process is that, after both One reason why that is important to me is that sides sign, the Council examines the proposal for when I co-chaired with the Nigerian Trade Minister conclusions and sends the agreement to the Parliament a commission for an all-party group on trade and for its consent. The 11th stage is consideration by the development in the Commonwealth, it became abundantly committee of what to recommend to the plenary, and clear to me that, to be a force for good in the world, consent or no consent is then given to the agreement. trade also now has to take into consideration all those There are 12 parliamentary stages in the negotiating components. The British trade approach could be an process. especially good force for good for development around We understand that the Government have made the world. We know that until recent years trade only two agreements so far. One is with Switzerland. agreements have not been proactive in the areas of The text from the Swiss party was immediately put gender, human rights or those parts of society that online; the text from the British side came subsequently. have not been economically empowered. We could see But we should do a case study of the announcement trade agreements not simply as protective measures or last week of what our Government said was an agreement as things where we are fearful of giving away British in principle to sign a free trade agreement with Israel, negotiation positions; we could see them as potential while the Israeli Minister, Eli Cohen, said that the text forces for good. was “concluded” on 23 January. I asked the Library to The second element of Parliament being involved find a copy of that agreement—but there is none. I in setting a mandate by resolution is a proactive understand from the Government that the text will mechanism for that. It is why this is now established in be placed in the House alongside an explanatory the European Union and I believe it would be of great memorandum and an associated parliamentary report merit for our Parliament to be involved in it. The third in due course, once the agreement has received signature. component proposed in the amendments is transparency, involving Parliament and the people, whom ultimately 6 pm we all represent, because they are likely to be a key If we had been following the stages under the part of these trade negotiations. We know from the European system, things would have been different. previous examples how difficult some trade negotiations The European Parliament would already have been can be, and that is when we look at the impact on both involved in the content of the talks, and been allowed our communities and those of the country with which the parameters for discussion. The Parliament would we are signing up to an agreement. The final component then be told that the negotiators were close to finalising is scrutiny before signing, which I believe to be of the agreement, and the texts would be sent at an fundamental importance. That quadruple lock is informal level to the Parliament. Once the agreement important. In essence, it is simply a way of replicating had been initialled, the initialled text would immediately British representation through the European Union. be sent to the Parliament. I understand that, if it is an We have elected representatives in the European agreement in principle, but we do not know whether Parliament who take part in the early stages of our text with the Israeli Government has been initialled; negotiations. There is a very helpful document called perhaps the Minister can clarify that. If it were then Negotiating EU Trade Agreements: Who Does What signed, that text would be included too. and How WeReach a Final Deal. It is very straightforward Potentially, therefore, there are five steps when the and simple. It shows that even in preparing the position European Parliament would have been involved—whereas that it will take, the Commission publishes its negotiating we are not. Why is that fundamentally important? The directives online and sends them to the Parliament. Israeli agreement is a good example. It touches on The Parliament is informed at the earliest stage of the many aspects of international law, human rights and process and even prior to that. After each negotiating domestic legislation. Our domestic legislation, in addition round, reports are presented to both the Council and to the European agreement, on the treatment of goods the European Parliament, as was the case in the latest from the illegally occupied territories and settlements, round involving Australia. I tried looking on the British means that we as a Parliament should be aware at the Government’s website to find out about our discussions early stages of what our Government are discussing that led to the mutual recognition agreement with with the Israeli Government. Australia but there was nothing. That was in stark To find out only at the last stage, when we can do contrast to the position with the Commission. nothing other than to delay or not to ratify an agreement, The fourth stage is that, when the Commission is not appropriate. So I hope that the Government will plans to table negotiation proposals, it informs the be able to confirm the current status of this live European Parliament about them, and it then informs example of a continuity agreement. Can the Government the European Parliament at every stage of the confirm, on the record, that they have initialled an developments, keeping it updated. The Parliament is agreement that does not put into any question the then able, through its Committee on International status of products from the illegal settlements, and Trade, to pass resolutions on the progress of those that we will honour our decade-long commitment in processes. When the negotiators from the two sides how we treat this agreement? When will they bring come close to finalising the text, the Commission tells forward the text of the agreement? the Parliament. The Commission also informally sends This is a live example of a continuity agreement, on the text to the Parliament. In finalising the process, the which there is not the transparency that the Government chief negotiators of both parties usually initial the text claim that they wish to bring about. We seek, at the of the proposed agreement to mark the end of the very least, to replicate the position that British negotiations and that text is sent to the Parliament. representatives have in the European Parliament. We 1089 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1090 also seek to ensure that the role of elected bodies is not continuity measure that lasts for the transitional period— diminished in the proper negotiation of these deep what is sometimes laughingly called the implementation and comprehensive trading agreements. phase, in which nothing is implemented—but for circumstances in which we have to operate an independent Viscount Waverley (CB): The noble Lord has drawn trade policy on 30 March 2019? attention to the issue of scrutiny by the European Parliament. In listening to him, it occurs to me—he Viscount Younger of Leckie: I had only just started, may wish to agree—that one of the difficulties is that and I stand by my words, because I was about to go on the UK Parliament is so underresourced. Do we have to say that, none the less, I understand the desire of the resources to carry out the type of scrutiny to which noble Lords, including the noble Lord, Lord Hannay, he draws attention? to debate these issues today—and that is what we have just done. I also appreciate the desire to understand Lord Purvis of Tweed: I believe we do. Not only are how the Government intend to fulfil our commitments we resourced in Parliament, but we are resourced in to transparency on and scrutiny of future FTAs as we this House. Our committees do a remarkable job in exit the EU. scrutinising both European legislation and secondary The amendments on future FTAs pursue many legislation. As we approach the Bill, many noble Lords aims, which the Government understand. To be helpful stand ready to scrutinise proactively and constructively to the House, during my remarks I will give as much some of the proposals. But we cannot do that if our information as I can on progress and process on FTAs. role is only at the last stage. Indeed, the Government I will also answer the question raised earlier by the would be much more effective in securing final agreements noble Lord, Lord Hannay—but not just yet—and will on such arrangements if Parliament were involved at agree with the remarks made by my noble friend Lady the early stages. If that principle had been applied to Fairhead. the process of negotiating our withdrawal, we might Amendments 33 and 99, which the noble Lord, now be in a different position. Lord Stevenson, spoke to, seek to ensure that Parliament has a significant role in free trade agreements via the Lord Fox (LD): The noble Lord, Lord Lilley, before creation of a new Joint Committee. Amendments 71 he had to hurry off, spoke of transparency as if it were to 74, which the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, spoke to, a threat to negotiation. Speaking to another amendment seek to achieve similar outcomes through imposing earlier, the noble Baroness, Lady Neville-Rolfe, who obligations on the Government in relation to mandate- has more contemporary experience than the noble setting, transparency and scrutiny before signature. I Lord, spoke of her regrets about the TTIP negotiation, will address those amendments together. and the fact that the NHS brouhaha that blew up around it scuppered, or terminally injured, that First, I shall give a little context. Brexit does not negotiation. Transparency is not a prerequisite just change the fundamental constitutional principles that because it is a good thing; in the modern world it is underpin the negotiation of international treaties. The needed to get consent for such things to happen. In the making of treaties, including international trade world we live in today,such negotiations can be stopped— agreements, is a function of the Executive. At the same and if we think the TTIP negotiation was an example time, it has long been held—and this Government of that, we have not seen anything until we have seen a continue to hold—that Parliament should have the US treaty being negotiated. Transparency is not just a opportunity to scrutinise treaties effectively.In 2010, the good thing; it is an enabler, which allows us to have Constitutional Reform and Governance Act confirmed, such treaties. after a process of consultation, the respective roles of the Government and Parliament in treaty-making. Viscount Younger of Leckie (Con): My Lords, forgive The Government will continue to support and facilitate me for stretching the definition of repetition, but parliamentary scrutiny of treaties under CRaG. before I address the amendments in detail I would like The noble Lord, Lord Purvis, asked about the to underline the fact that the Bill concerns continuity Israeli trade agreement. There is agreement in principle for our existing EU free trade agreements as we leave on an FTA, but subject to— the European Union. I mention that without wishing to revisit the emphasis that we placed on the word Lord Bilimoria: My Lords— “continuity” on Monday last week. Scrutiny of new free trade agreements is not part of the Bill, nor is Viscount Younger of Leckie: If I may be allowed to scrutiny of our future relationship with the EU. complete this point, I will then give way to the noble Lord. There is agreement in principle on an FTA, but Lord Hannay of Chiswick: I really plead with the it is subject to a few remaining technical issues so the noble Viscount not to say that again. We all know that final text is not quite ready.When a continuity agreement if, through inadvertence or incompetence,the Government is finalised, it will be laid with an Explanatory take us over the cliff on 29 March, this Bill—by then, Memorandum and report. presumably, an Act—will be the only instrument we have to guide our trade policy. Therefore, will he Lord Bilimoria: I thank the Minister for giving way. please stop saying that it is only about continuity and He mentioned that the Government are for scrutiny, admit, as his noble friend Lady Fairhead did when so why are these amendments required? The amendments replying to an earlier amendment, that it is meant to have been tabled because there is a complete lack of be capable of providing for both eventualities? Will it parliamentary participation in the Trade Bill. Surely provide not only for the eventuality in which it is a he can understand the uneasiness of this House. The 1091 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1092

[LORD BILIMORIA] points. Once an FTA has been negotiated, it will need Government tried to railroad the implementation of to be implemented and then ratified. I remind the Article 50 without the permission of Parliament, and House that free trade agreements cannot of themselves the case had to go all the way to the Supreme Court change domestic law. for Parliament to have a say. The Government then To implement a new trade agreement with a new tried to withhold a meaningful vote from Parliament, partner, the Government will bring forward a bespoke and Parliament had to fight for that. The Government piece of primary legislation for each new trade agreement tried to hide their legal advice and Parliament had to that requires changes to legislation where there are no fight for its disclosure. Now we have Henry VIII existing powers. Parliament will have the opportunity powers being implemented left, right and centre and a to scrutinise the new legislation in the normal way. Trade Bill acting in a similar way over future trade agreements. Those agreements are going to be hugely difficult to Lord Purvis of Tweed: I am grateful to the Minister negotiate. They take a long time to implement, as I for giving way; his contributions are helpful. This may know.India has only nine bilateral free trade agreements be a technical point, because we have had an element with other countries, and not one with a western of that statement from the Government at Second country. This process is going to be hugely difficult, Reading. There could be a marked difference regarding and it looks as if Parliament is going to be cut out of it a trade agreement that could have a big impact on our altogether. We are wrecking the constitution of our country, but which does not require any changes to country and the balance between the legislature, the primary legislation. If a trade agreement does not Executive and the judiciary. I do not think the Minister require any changes to primary legislation because can just say, “We are allowing scrutiny”. that is still on the statute book, the Government are proposing that no measures be brought to Parliament Viscount Younger of Leckie: If the noble Lord will to approve—only the primary legislation, if that does allow me to continue, he will see that I am not saying not currently exist. The case made by noble Lords is that Parliament has been cut out of this altogether; far that a trade agreement in its own right needs to come from it. I said at the beginning of my remarks that I forward for authorisation, regardless of whether it would give as much information as I could, and I hope requires additional primary legislation. That is the it will give reassurance to the noble Lord and indeed point we need to get across. the whole Committee. 6.15 pm Baroness Kramer: I am sorry to trouble the Minister but I have one question. I did not quite understand Viscount Younger of Leckie: The noble Lord makes what he meant just now by the word “finalised” when a good point. I reassure him that what is also very he talked about the treaty with the Israelis. If he meant important is that the negotiation and scrutiny of these that the treaty would be a signed done deal and would trade agreements has to allow for a certain flexibility. I then be brought to Parliament so that we could look at will go on to say a little more about the process, it, would we scrutinise it? Would it be like an SI, because implicit in it is that treaties between different whereby we cannot impact the terms in any way, so we types of countries using different types of products simply have the nuclear option of accepting or rejecting can be extremely different, as the noble Lord will be it? The message of this House has been that we regard aware, so flexibility is very important. scrutiny as something far more contributory than The legislation must be brought forward before that, involving engagement in the process at a much ratification, as I was saying. The same will be true of earlier stage. That is why we are extremely troubled. our future relationship with the EU, which will surely Will the Minister clarify exactly what he means by require detailed implementing legislation. I hope this “involving Parliament”—after the fact or before the fact? demonstrates that the Government are already committed to Parliament being able to shape and scrutinise future Viscount Younger of Leckie: As I said earlier, I have trade agreements. I listened carefully to what the noble some more remarks to make about the process for Lord, Lord Purvis, said about current processes and future trade agreements. What I said about the Israeli steps in considering trade agreements. However, since agreement was that when a continuity agreement is July work has been taking place in both Houses to finalised, it will be laid with an Explanatory Memorandum consider Parliament’srole in future free trade agreements. and report and will be under the affirmative procedure. The Constitution Committee has an ongoing inquiry I will briefly touch on what we have already committed into the parliamentary scrutiny of treaties. The Joint to in this area. My right honourable friend the Secretary Committee on Human Rights is inquiring into human of State for International Trade reiterated in an Oral rights protections in international agreements, and Statement that Parliament should have a crucial role that touches on Parliament’s role. In the other place, to play in future free trade agreements. The Government the International Trade Committee published a report just will ensure that parliamentarians are given the opportunity after Christmas that makes a number of recommendations to consider the level of ambition of the Government’s in this area. approach to negotiations and the potential implications To assist the noble Lord, Lord Hannay, the of any agreements. We will lay our outline approach to Government are listening carefully to these views and each negotiation before both Houses in order to facilitate we are conducting our own work. We have little quarrel that before we begin negotiations. During negotiations with his remarks and aspirations, and I hope there is the Government will keep both Houses updated on agreement there. We recognise, not least following the progress, including providing analysis of appropriate resolution of this House on Monday, that more detail 1093 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1094 is needed on how we envisage Parliament—and place might give anybody engaged in such negotiations particularly this House—being involved in the scrutiny pause for thought; it is important that they know of trade agreements. The question of how Parliament during the negotiations that they can take Parliament scrutinises future FTAs must be answered, with the with them. benefit of close and considered dialogue between the Government and Members of Parliament. I have listened Viscount Younger of Leckie: I said at the beginning to the contributions of noble Lords today, and I that this is likely to be a wide-ranging debate; my assure the Committee and the noble Lord, Lord Hannay, noble friend’s remarks will indeed be fed into the that we will reflect on them seriously. I confirm again processes being considered at the moment. that we will bring forward our proposals with more I would like to address a question raised by the noble detail before Report. Lord, Lord Stevenson, who asked what access parliamentarians would have to negotiating texts. We Lord Purvis of Tweed: That is very helpful. As the take seriously our commitment to keeping Parliament Minister knows, the devolved Administrations have apprised of the Government’s negotiating intentions. also submitted evidence to the International Trade That is for the purposes not just of transmitting Committee in the Commons and are participating in information but of inviting scrutiny and allowing the revision process. The devolved Administrations Parliament and its committees to take informed views. were mentioned specifically in the resolution of this While we support Parliament’s important scrutiny role, House last Monday. I wonder if, in advance of the Ministers have a specific responsibility,which Parliament Government bringing forward any of their proposals, has endorsed, not to release information that could they could write to noble Lords or give a clear statement undermine our negotiating position. On transparency on how they envisage the devolved Administrations, more generally, I reiterate our commitment to a and potentially the regions of England and the combined transparent approach. We are developing proposals authorities, having an active role. for the release of updates on negotiations; we will bring these forward shortly. Viscount Younger of Leckie: I thank the noble Lord for that. It does indeed take us back to the debate we Let me say more about the consultation process, an had last week, and I hope he remembers that I gave issue raised by the noble Lord, Lord Stevenson. The certain reassurances on that point. What I can say— amendments also seek to ensure wide consultation on without having the details in front of me—is that, as FTAs, which is a good idea; indeed, that is the approach he knows, there is ongoing dialogue with the devolved the Government are taking. We conducted one of the Administrations to ensure that they are kept fully in largest consultation exercises ever undertaken for the touch with what we are doing. That will be the general new FTAs we are considering with partners without tenor of the ongoing discussions as we look forward an existing FTA with the EU—the US, New Zealand to FTAs. and Australia—and for our potential accession to CPTPP. This included a 14-week public consultation I would like to pick up on some of the remarks open to all businesses, individuals and other organisations made by the noble Lord, Lord Bilimoria, in the last in the UK and abroad, and 12 outreach events throughout debate as they are relevant to this point. He asked how the UK, including in each of the devolved nations. We our approach differs from the role of the European have also conducted ongoing engagement with Parliament in EU trade negotiations. He may well stakeholders on trade policy, including “town hall” know this but I shall spell it out: the European Parliament’s style briefings, roundtables with different groups of role operates in relation to EU trade policy. We are stakeholders, regular stakeholder briefings and webinars offering scrutiny for the UK Parliament at every stage designed to engage with smaller and regional stakeholders. of the process in a way that is appropriate and proportionate to the UK constitutional context. In the I would also like to touch on impact assessments. I UK, the power to make treaties is a power held by do not propose to address— government, but the context of the negotiations will be different. The European Commission negotiates Lord Purvis of Tweed: I am grateful to the Minister free trade agreements representing the interests of for giving way; he is being very tolerant. He may recall the 28 member states. It is given the mandate to do so that I mentioned on Second Reading that I took part by the Council, and final agreements are approved by in one of those consultations, posing—if that is the the European Parliament and the Council before they correct word—as a Scottish business and taking part can come into force. UK-only free trade agreements in the Government’s consultation on the prospective will be negotiated by the elected Government in the trade agreement with the United States. I mentioned best interests of the UK. The Ministers responsible for then and repeat now that in that consultation, I was the negotiations are directly accountable to Parliament. presented with no information about what the parameters of any trade arrangements with the United States were Lord Lansley: My noble friend might also reflect likely to be. In effect, I was being asked questions the that there is some truth in what the noble Lord, parameters of which I did not know. That is not Lord Kerr of Kinlochard, reminded us of in meaningful consultation. Can the Government reflect previous debates. American negotiators often find there on the consultation process they have carried out? I do is significant benefit in having what I think they describe not believe it was sufficiently meaningful. as “Congress reserve” in negotiations—what we might call “parliamentary reserve”. That sense of engagement Viscount Younger of Leckie: I am listening to the with Parliament during the course of negotiations is noble Lord. I do not know the details of that negotiation, important in itself. What happened last night in another but I will take that back and reflect on it. There may 1095 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1096

[VISCOUNT YOUNGER OF LECKIE] impact assessments in this speech, as the issue was have been some very good reasons why the information addressed in earlier Committee debates and I believe was not forthcoming, but I will reflect on that and the Government’s position is clear. Nor will I revisit write to the noble Lord with some information. the assurances that we have already given on our absolute commitment not to lower standards through Lord Hannay of Chiswick: I am very grateful to the trade agreements. noble Viscount for some of the remarks he made Let me move on to the future relationship with the about what the Government are likely to do before EU. One amendment in this group—Amendment 59, Report in tabling their own amendments on the tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Purvis—is targeted negotiating process. That was helpful and it will be specifically at our future relationship negotiations with good to look forward to that. However, in everything the EU. I appreciate what the noble Lord is trying to he said, I am afraid I detect an unwillingness to give do here in replicating Section 13 of the European Parliament a role at a time when it would really help. Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. However, Section 13 Everything he said involves decorating the final stage—the was drafted for the very particular context of our approval of an agreement already negotiated—with withdrawal package under Article 50. It is not an all sorts of wonderful bells and whistles. We all know appropriate or necessary mechanism for Parliament to that then you have only the nuclear option. You have approve our future relationship treaties with the EU. concluded the negotiations and, if Parliament objects, With Section 13, we knew what form of documents you cannot amend the text that has been negotiated were coming to us for approval. We then judged it with the third country. If it objects, it can reject the necessary to create a role for Parliament over and agreement and that will be very damaging for the above the existing provisions of the Constitutional national interest and the relationship with that country. Reform and Governance Act 2010, or CRaG, to I listened very carefully to the noble Viscount. At ensure that the withdrawal agreement treaty and the one stage, he claimed that the Government would accompanying political declaration could be considered negotiate on trade as the Executive and under their as one package. right to do so. That is just the problem. The word This amendment, however, is grappling with the “mandate” did not come into a single thing he said. difficulty of trying to legislate for a treaty or treaties All I can say—politely, I hope—is that when the where the number and form of those treaties is not Government table their amendments,the word “mandate” yet known. The amendment attempts to bypass this had better be there. If it is not, I think they will get issue by linking its provisions to any trade agreement badly stuck. It is not magic. The mandates under that, which the European Union negotiates are quite general; “gives effect to any or all of the provisions set out in the framework they are not specific about this or that tariff, but they for the future relationship so far as they relate to trade”. are very helpful in setting the parameters under which However, this leaves it unclear which treaties would be the negotiations are conducted. I believe the Government caught and whether it would remain active long into would benefit from that, so please think a little about the future,beyond the conclusion of our future relationship the word “mandate”. negotiations. The Committee can be reassured that our future trade agreements with the EU are bound to Viscount Younger of Leckie: Again, I listen carefully be subject to the provisions of the Constitutional to what the noble Lord says. The best way to answer Reform and Governance Act 2010. Furthermore, those him is to say that I will indeed feed back his views. agreements will almost certainly require detailed They are somewhat negative—somewhat too negative, implementing legislation, which means that the I would argue. I have spent a lot of time spelling out arrangements could not come into force without the the details of processes and procedures, as far as I can. authorisation of Parliament. No doubt this is a question Before I give way to the noble Viscount, I also mention to which we will return. I hope this reassures the that the noble Lord, Lord Hannay, said that we were Committee and that noble Lords will withdraw, or not going to table amendments on Report. I want to make move, their amendments. it absolutely clear that I have pledged to come forward with proposals before Report. I give way to the noble Viscount. 6.30 pm Lord Stevenson of Balmacara: My Lords, I am Viscount Waverley: I thank the noble Viscount. grateful to the Minister for his extensive response. He With the greatest respect, I think it would be fair to has been attempting, within the constraints he is describe the Government’srecord on bringing ratification undoubtedly under, to give us as much information as processes before Parliament as patchy. When the noble he can. I will need to read Hansard to be absolutely Viscount goes back to his department, I ask him to sure what we have and have not been promised. I consider the Government’s record in the ratification certainly heard the word “amendment” in one of his timing process, so that that can be included in some sentences, but it may have been a misunderstanding on way, either in this amendment or the Bill at large. my part. If there are not to be amendments to this Bill, I am intrigued—that is parliamentary language for “a Viscount Younger of Leckie: That is a helpful bit confused”—about what exactly the Government contribution from the noble Viscount. I think he has are going to offer us to resolve the obligation placed some experience in these matters, so I will certainly on the House by the Motion passed in the name of my pass that on. I would like to move on fairly rapidly to noble friend the Leader of the Opposition relating to talk about impact assessments, but I do not propose to progress on this Bill, which is a point that the noble address the aspects of these amendments regarding Lord, Lord Hannay, has also raised. 1097 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1098

We can hope that the two aspirations at play here come together, because despite the Minister’s valiant Amendment 34 attempt to remind us that this is a continuity Bill—an aspiration negated in the second amendment after we Moved by Lord Grantchester started this process, and continually ignored in every 34: After Clause 5, insert the following new Clause— amendment we have discussed so far—we should get “Division of agricultural tariff rate quotas real and understand that the mess we are in will not be It shall be the objective of an appropriate authority to take helped by having an artificial distinction between what all the necessary steps to ensure that after exit day the is a continuity issue and what will be a non-continuity division of agricultural tariff rate quotas with the issue, or, in other words, the real world in which we European Union remains at the same level as prior to live. We need to get this right, and we on this side of exit day.” the House have offered—I am sure the party on my left has also offered—to work through this with the Lord Grantchester (Lab): My Lords, I declare my Government, and that offer remains on the table. We interests as stated in the register. Tariff-rate quotas will meet at any time, at the Government’s request, to have been set for mostly agricultural products, to see if we can come together to make something of this allow some countries preferential access to the EU that will work for the future, because it is that important. single market below the tariff rate set for those products. That said, I endorse what has been said by others: The UK does not have its own national tariffs but any attempt to rely on the procedures in the Constitutional merely shares in the amounts set for all member states Reform and Governance Act 2010 will be doomed to across the EU. This is most important to the agricultural failure. The Government have to get over that hurdle sector and industry, as it sets out the quantity that before we can make significant progress. The 2010 Act comes into the EU at preferred competitive rates, is inadequate as a process, and would be inadequate bearing in mind that products still have to be compliant under any terms, because it allows the Government to with the relevant EU standards. use the negative resolution procedure for secondary On exit, these TRQs at EU level will need to be split legislation, so that the treaty we agree comes into law between the remaining states and the UK. The proposal automatically, irrespective of any opposition or agreed between the EU and UK is that the product amendments Parliament might want to make, provided quota should be split according to the relevant usage it has been laid before Parliament for 21 sitting days. or consumption of the product in the UK and EU. That is not the right process, as we are talking about The difficulty arises on the specific quantities, as there trying to get Parliament to engage with the process by is a lack of data to inform the division. Although there bringing it back to the mandate arrangements, and is detailed information on the point of arrival of allowing Parliament plenty of time, lots of information, products into the EU, there is not the same detail a good process and a proper committee structure for regarding where the product may be consumed. The proper decisions to be reached in the public interest. EU and UK, in bilateral discussions, have agreed to The Government should not play games with procedures adjust the schedules without triggering renegotiations and say,“We’ve got that already,so why are we bothering under Article XXVIII of GATT. This was submitted about it?” This needs to be dismantled and rebuilt in a in October 2017. However, it was almost immediately way fit for the 21st century. challenged by the large exporting countries, such as A new system is required, and the time has come. the US, Brazil, Australia and New Zealand. If there is any doubt about the interest in that, the I cannot overstress how critical this issue is to Minister should be aware that six major business British agriculture and the nation’s consumers. It is federations—the CBI, the BCC, the EEF, the ICC, the revealing that so many glib answers are often proposed IoD and the FSB—have taken the unprecedented, in in the current impasse over Brexit. From a lack of my experience, step of bringing forward a joint statement information and knowledge, poor judgments are made, with the TUC, Unite, the Trade Justice Movement, the leading to a lack of appreciation of the consequences. Consumers’ Association, Which? and other industry I am sure I do not need to explain to the Minister the bodies calling for a proper model of consultation and delicate balances in the market, where price volatility scrutiny to govern the UK’s policy-making process in results from small changes in supply, quite irrespective the future. The Government cannot ignore that; it has of the huge discrepancies in tariffs under preferential to be something that they will do. treatment and other third countries that have allowed We will come back to this, whether in the form managed change to take place. articulated by the Minister, or in amendments we To give one example, Britain’s sheep exports, with consider at later stages. I hope there will be a Report large implications for the Welsh economy, comprise stage, because the Bill is important and needs to go more than one-third of production, with almost all of through, but the danger is that delay or difficulty in it destined for Europe. This trade is virtually one-way, coming forward with something clear enough for this with minimal imports from the EU. Without agreement, House to respond to will mean the Government finding and a smooth transition, tariffs to the EU would themselves in real difficulty on the Bill. I do not say render this trade immediately uneconomic. The seriousness that lightly; the last thing we want to do is use procedural of the issue was underlined by a joint letter from the issues to hold back what is, at its heart, a good piece of British Retail Consortium, signed by the chief executives legislation, which we support. I beg leave to withdraw of all the major supermarkets—Sainsbury’s, Asda, the amendment. M&S and Waitrose, among others—only two days ago. The BRC stated that it wanted to maintain the Amendment 33 withdrawn. same tariff-rate quotas. The wording of the amendment 1099 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1100

[LORD GRANTCHESTER] there are ongoing negotiations in which we have to signifies that it is a probing amendment to ask the monitor what concessions are being offered to secure Government to provide some certainty in their answers the prize of certification. My amendment asks for a to the challenges, and their approach to the future. report from the Government to be clear about what Amendment 54, in the name of the noble Lord, that position is. Lord Purvis, calls for a report to Parliament, and I As with the debate we had on the previous group, I look forward to the noble Lord’s remarks. The concern was able to secure information about what had happened is that access to the home market—and, hence, the at the WTO market access committee in October, and vibrancy and well-being of agriculture and the rural the position of the other countries and of the EU. I economy—will be sacrificed as a pawn in negotiations was able to see the text of a Council regulation, in rolling over trade deals to be ratified by third EC32/2000—the proposal to modify the implementation countries in the future, especially in relation to the of the tariff-rate quotas bound in the GATT. The interests of other industries. The Committee has already discussions that took place between the Council and debated the fear that standards would also be under the European Parliament have been reported on. On jeopardy. It is imperative that the UK Government 14 November the Parliament decided to enter into continue to maintain the present TRQs. I beg to move. inter-institutional negotiations based on the Council’s report on its proposal. In none of that has it even been Lord Purvis of Tweed: My Lords, Amendment 54 is suggested that there could be a role for our Parliament in my name. As the noble Lord, Lord Grantchester, in discussing with the Government the potential impacts pointed out, the division of the tariff-rate quotas is of of the concessions offered to secure approval for our great importance to parts of the UK economy,especially TRQ division. The provisional agreement reached with the rural economy, but it is also important to our the Council at the Parliament on 10 December to trading partners. Some likely trading partners when it discuss what the European Union’s position would be comes to agriculture have already stated their concern is in stark contrast to this place, where there have been about the agreement the UK and EU have reached. no equivalent proceedings with the British Government. I admit that this amendment was prepared with the If we are not going to be involved as the European expectation that there would be more than a month Parliament is on the European side, at the very least between the Act coming into force and exit day. That we need a report on what the likely impact will be after was a naive hope. I thought that the Government the Bill becomes an Act, if it does so. On that basis, I might have been able to have this legislation on the hope the Government will accept that we need much statute book long before, but with the delays that have more information not only about the current standpoint occurred I admit that one month would be tight but, similar to what the European Commission has between the Act receiving Royal Assent and potential provided to the European Parliament, on what the exit day.Nevertheless,the core element of the amendment, likely impact will be. which seeks to get clarity on the UK’s position, is important. Clarity is sought in two areas: first, what 6.45 pm our current position is regarding discussions with third countries about the division of the tariff-rate Baroness Byford (Con): My Lords, I declare my quotas; and, secondly, how the Government would family’s farming interests. I have read and reread the consider the impact of these decisions on our economy. amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Grantchester. I As the noble Lord, Lord Grantchester, indicated, have a couple of queries, so I have to ask whether he agreement was reached between the UK and the EU and my noble friend the Minister can help me. in 2017. He was right that that provoked immediate My worry is this: the amendment would surely tie objections. The countries considered that the changes the UK Government to whatever the rate is at that proposed by the EU and the UK for the division of moment and not look towards the future. There is no the tariff-rate quotas amounted to more than simple timeframe or limit on this, as far as I can see. My rectification of the schedules. The European Parliament concern is whether this means that the negotiation said in a report to its own committee that the changes had, would not allow for the improvement of the UK’s “involved less flexibility and market access for their exporters”. share in a particular agricultural tariff-rate quota. As Its stated objections to the EU-UK quota subdivision, a result, would the amendment close the door to saying that, meaningful discussions of recent changes to the UK “other concessions should compensate for the loss of market share of a particular quota? access”. I heard what the noble Lord, Lord Grantchester, These are the questions that the European Parliament said. He is a great ambassador of long standing for is asking the Commission about what concessions standards and equality,and on fair trading for agricultural there are likely to be. The questions the European goods in general; I hope I am as well. He is quite right Parliament is asking the Commission are ones that to raise the whole question of fair trade and the this Parliament should be asking our Government. standards that are set for our producers. When we first The expectation might be that we will want to trade discussed this last Monday—I think; I lose track of on certified WTO schedules. As the Minister said where we are at—we talked in great depth about the previously, it is not necessary for us to trade under expectations of a product, how it is produced and the these, but they are desirable because they mean that responsibilities and standards set. the negotiations, on which concessions could be provided, I do not think I need to ask the Government to pay are not ongoing, and that concessions have either exceptional attention to the needs of the agricultural been provided and then accepted and settled, or that industry, but the noble Lord raises a very important 1101 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1102 point regarding sheep farmers in particular. Sheepmeat from Brazil, America or Australia—in any potential is not eaten as much in this country as it used to be, free trade agreement that we are seeking to make but it is exported widely. Trade with Europe is very primarily on behalf of our manufacturing and service important and I hope there will be trade beyond sectors. It might well be something on which we need Europe, but I wondered whether he could explain to put down a marker now. the way the amendment is written, because I have The Government might have some difficulty with apprehensions about it. Will my noble friend the Minister the wording of my noble friend’s amendment, but we be able to explain? Maybe she does not share my slight need to know what their position is on this. Otherwise, concerns but I felt they were worth raising. The thrust we will be presented with a whole series of treaties that of the amendment is right but I am not sure that the incorporate the existing division, which might not be wording is. to our benefit and, more importantly,will set a precedent for how we are going to deal with future treaties and Baroness McIntosh of Pickering: I congratulate the agricultural trade within that context. noble Lord, Lord Grantchester—on what I think might be his birthday—on moving the amendment. I repeat my concerns relating to the earlier group of amendments, Baroness Fairhead: My Lords, I thank the noble not just for the hill farmers of Wales but for the hill Lords, Lord Grantchester and Lord Purvis, for tabling farmers of the north of England, including North Amendments 34 and 54 and for giving this House the Yorkshire, County Durham and Northumbria, and opportunity to discuss this important area. I entirely Scotland, as well as other parts of the United Kingdom. agree with the concerns that have been raised, particularly The noble Lord raised his concerns in an interesting on areas such as agricultural products, affecting farmers way but I have to echo my noble friend Lady Byford’s and rural areas, which were addressed by the noble concerns, which she so ably addressed. It would be Lord, Lord Grantchester, and my noble friends Lady helpful for the Minister to explain whether our Byford and Lady McIntosh. I would like to take these understanding is correct and what the relationship is two amendments together,because there is a fair amount between this amendment and the earlier tariffs we of overlap in the questions that each amendment discussed, and whether, if we were to introduce the raises. I would also like to do so in some detail, zero-rate tariff, this would equally be of concern with because they cover a very technical area and I hope this amendment. that my clarification will help—that is the aim of what I am trying to do. Lord Whitty (Lab): My Lords, I would like to put in We have tariff-rate quotas both in the existing EU a brief word here. The noble Baroness, Lady Byford, FTAs that we are working to roll over and in our will recall that, towards the end of the time when WTO schedules. A different approach is required for she and I were crossing swords on agricultural each, which I am happy to explain. In doing so, I will policy, the issue of agricultural trade multilaterally fell also address each amendment first as it refers to the down in the Doha round precisely on this issue of EU FTAs and then as it relates to the WTO TRQs. I tariff-rate quotas. The amendment of my noble friend will first address TRQs in EU free trade agreements. Lord Grantchester—who was also present on those The EU has been clear that it will not revise its free occasions—is a probing amendment to see how we are trade agreements with third countries as a result of the going to deal with the situation for imports. UK exiting the EU. This is because usage of those Our exports, to which the noble Baronesses, quotas tends to be low. The UK is therefore engaging Lady Byford and Lady McIntosh, referred, are also directly with our trading partners to agree new TRQs vitally important, but we need to have a line from the to apply under the continuity agreements, and we are Government in relation to the existing tariff quotas making good progress. We are agreeing TRQs for the for European imports with a number of our trading same products at levels that protect existing trade partners. It is not necessarily in the interests of those flows. We will continue to report fully to Parliament trading partners to preserve what is de facto the UK on the TRQs agreed as part of our Clauses 3 and 5 share of imports from them to the whole of the EU. reports on changes to the agreements. Amendment 34 Some of them are fly enough to actually notice that would therefore be impossible to implement in respect their bargaining position in relation to the UK on its of EU FTAs, as there is no division with the EU to own might be slightly greater than their bargaining refer back to. position in relation to the EU as a whole. It is therefore On Amendment 54, as I mentioned, the Government not entirely surprising that, in these existing potential have already committed to lay before Parliament for rollover treaties, there might be some attempt to change each transitional FTAa report that sets out anysubstantial the amount of imports that the tariff quota allows changes to trade-related matters. These reports will into the UK. That itself, of course, is potentially a include details of changes to the TRQs. Let me assure danger to our domestic production in many of these noble Lords that the reports will also include an areas. However, assuming that it will be an easy task indication of the impacts associated with the changes simply to roll over all of these existing EU-wide to the TRQs. However, we would not expect there to treaties is one of the features of the Government’s be substantial business impacts from changes to TRQs, complacency. as we are maintaining TRQs for the same products Of course, the issue becomes even more important sized at a level which protects existing trade flows. when rather bigger agricultural producers might actually On the EU Council decision relating to the modification be approached by us, or approach us, for a free trade of TRQs, to which the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, agreement down the line, when their interests will referred, I am happy to write to the noble Lord on that undoubtedly be to press for very high import quotas— point and I will put a letter in the Library. 1103 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1104

[BARONESS FAIRHEAD] 7 pm I turn now to the TRQs found in our WTO schedules. My noble friend Lady Byford raised the issue of Here, the Government have taken quite a number of whether we could improve on them in the future. Our steps, and in addressing these amendments I believe it main focus in this phase is on continuity, ensuring that would be of value to noble Lords if I walked through there is as much certainty for farmers and businesses them. To prepare to leave the EU, the United Kingdom as possible—that is our first aim. The future is another has had to establish its own schedules of goods and issue, but our primary focus now is continuity. services at the WTO. In doing so, we have taken the approach that we should maintain our current Lord Purvis of Tweed: The Minister has been obligations as far as possible. This was announced to exceptionally helpful and very clear, but I hope she both Houses through Written Ministerial Statements will be able to address one question. If we leave on 5 December 2016. While much of our goods schedule without an agreement with the EU and this process of is directly replicable—for example, our bound tariff negotiation is under way, what will bind us to have the rates—some parts, such as tariff-rate quotas, are not. same position as the EU when it comes to what is Quotas are not directly replicable because they are a being queried: namely, the methodology of the division quantity coming into the EU 28, as your Lordships of the timeframe and the statistics? It seems that if we will know, and if they were exactly replicated this leave without an agreement, there is no mechanism would lead to an expansion of market access into both whereby we can consistently have the same position as the EU and the UK. This is why the Government the EU. At the moment, we have the same interest agreed a co-operative approach with the EU to apportion because of the agreement signed, but that is not a WTO tariff-rate quotas, based on historic trade flows. binding agreement that we have with the EU going This was agreed in October 2017 and communicated forward. What, then, would link us to ensure that we publicly through a joint letter by the UK and EU have the same position? If that is not in place, a third ambassadors to the WTO. country, quite rightly, would have doubts as to whether The UK schedule was finalised in July 2018. We the EU position would be the same as that of the UK, sent it to the WTO on 19 July, and once again both and vice versa. Houses were informed through Written Ministerial Statements. Our schedule then began its formal three- Baroness Fairhead: My understanding—again, I will month certification period on 24 July. That period was write to the noble Lord if this is not the case—is that completed on 24 October. While most WTO members the apportionment approach that was being used is agreed with our approach, as I and the Secretary of utterly within WTO provisions and normal practice. State for International Trade once again explained The WTO laws will dictate how that process works through Written Ministerial Statements laid on 25 October, and, therefore, as I said, the EU is pursuing its own some WTO members have argued that their market Article XXVIII and we are pursuing ours; they are access has been reduced by our approach to TRQs. separate legally but obviously complementary. On the This is why we announced the Government’s intention noble Lord’s specific question about what else oversees to enter GATT Article XXVIII negotiations on TRQs that, I think it is more the WTO, but if that is incorrect, at the WTO to establish whether the apportionment I will write to him. we have proposed is a fair representation of the UK’s current rights and obligations. Lord Purvis of Tweed: I am grateful for that, and Between October and 21 December, when the the Minister is helpful. That leads on to my next point, Government formally launched the Article XXVIII which is that the countries themselves have said that process, work was completed to prepare the necessary other concessions could compensate for the loss of trade data and the notification for our Article XXVIII market access. Negotiations are therefore, by definition, process to begin. We are now in the first phase of this, discussions about whether the UK and the EU continue a 90-day notification period that lasts until 21 March 2019, to hold to their agreement or whether other compensation during which WTO members can examine our TRQ concessions could be offered. My question applies trade data and register an interest in negotiating with similarly to that. At the moment, we have a united us. After this, the UK will examine those claims and position with the European Union. If we leave without determine with whom and on which commodities we an agreement, nothing is in place to ensure that will be negotiating under Article XXVIII. concessions that could be offered to compensate for I should also mention briefly the EU’s corresponding the loss of market access will be united between the transition at the WTO. The EU has launched its own UK and the EU. That raises questions about whether, Article XXVIII process, as it, of course, apportioned when it comes to the discussions with third countries, the EU 28 TRQs with the United Kingdom. It formally they will seek different concessions from the UK. That started this on 22 July 2018. The reason it was able to opens up the whole issue that we are fearful about: will do so before the UK is because it did not have to we offer different concessions to other countries which establish a new schedule of its own. Our process and would potentially have a negative impact on our own that of the EU are legally distinct and are being industry? pursued separately. However, they are linked in that they derive from the same initial obligation, and WTO Baroness Fairhead: I said that I will write to the partners will need to be convinced that their access to noble Lord. I tried to address that in my first answer, the EU 27 and UK markets will be no less favourable and this is an inevitable follow-on question from that, once both processes are complete. So our processes are should my answer not have been correct. However, separate but complementary. they are two separate legal processes. 1105 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1106

Baroness Kramer: The Minister has been tolerant. that be after the conclusion of the implementation Perhaps I lack all the understanding I should have in period or in a no-deal scenario in April 2019. We are this area, but my understanding is that, to be effectively also able to negotiate, sign, ratify and bring into force a member of the WTO, it is necessary that the schedules trade agreements with uncertified WTO schedules. are approved by all the existing members—the Minister This situation is not without precedent. Indeed, the can correct me if that is wrong. There can be temporary EU has done precisely this for years while signing permissions when one is progressing along a path, but several trade agreements, including with Canada and in effect any member country has a veto, and that does Japan. not have to have a reasoned basis. If any country felt Given the broader work already in train, the impact that these new arrangements—the split of the tariff-free these amendments may have on that and the Statements quotas, if you like, that was on offer to them—was not that the Government have made and will continue to fair, it could not only argue that the arrangements make throughout our trade policy transitions, I ask were unfair but could simply say, “I don’t like this. that these amendments be withdrawn. Give me something better. And if you don’t give me something better, I’m not going to sign off on your schedule”. That means that we are then hampered in Lord Grantchester: My Lords, I thank the Minister functioning, even on WTO rules. Can the Minister for her answers and explanations. Once again, I am help me with that relationship? grateful to the Committee for allowing me to come forward with this probing amendment to understand better the processes and procedures that the Government Baroness Fairhead: I will try. First, the UK is already are currently undertaking. They will be of great a member of the WTO; it was a founder member and importance to large sections of our economy. They it is a member. When its schedules have been lodged, were put forward in the context of continuity—very they become the schedules, and even if they are not much, as the noble Baroness said, of rolling forward certified, we can continue to operate on that schedule. existing trade flows. Hence, I was very happy to take I committed to respond to the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, questioning and probing from the noble Baronesses, following a conversation we had following some press Lady Byford and Lady McIntosh, on the amendment’s reports about certification and whether one country meaning. The answer is that I wanted to get the could operate; I have the draft of the letter and am subject matter down for debate and to understand it about to sign it, and again, I will put a copy of that in better—and, indeed, to underline the difficulties of the Library. It is clear that a country can operate on an the word “improvement”, which the noble Baroness, uncertified schedule; indeed, the EU 28 are currently Lady Byford, used for how we might want to change operating on a schedule which is not an EU 28 schedule. things and go forward. Obviously, improvement means All that is set out in detail in this letter, which I hope different things to different stakeholders in the process. will provide satisfaction. I am very grateful to my noble friend Lord Whitty Having now laid before your Lordships the steps for explaining the background so comprehensively. the Government have taken at the WTO, I turn again What is really referred to is market access. Does to Amendments 34 and 54. We have made our proposed improvement mean better market access, and for whom? apportionment of WTO TRQs on the basis of the best How does this affect other stakeholders and the balance data available to us regarding recent patterns of trade of interests between the countryside, the food chain in the relevant products, so that any apportionment and consumer interest and consumer prices? I was not does not distort existing trade patterns. However, we really coming from the angle of an importer or an have always said that, should trading partners have exporter, but I wanted to have the issue debated. The alternative data, we would be prepared to examine Minister has provided a lot of background interest that in order not to distort trade flows in these and information that will certainly take a lot of reading commodities. If allowed, Amendment 34 would prevent and reflection. us doing this, and, in doing so, would undermine one Finally, the process outcome still seems far from of the UK’s obligations to our WTO partners at the clear. We will be talking about the apportionment that moment when we are re-establishing and reasserting can result from it and how this may still give rise to ourselves as an independent member of the WTO. anxieties and the balancing of those interests. Having Amendment 54 requests a report detailing our progress made those remarks, I am very grateful to the noble on GATT Article XXVIII negotiations. I trust that the Lords and noble Baronesses who have taken part in Government’s frequent updates on our WTO transition this little debate. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. reassure this House that the Government are committed to keeping Parliament informed at every stage of this process. We will continue to update Parliament as we Amendment 34 withdrawn. progress and complete our Article XXVIII process. The report in Amendment 54 also requests an Amendment 35 assessment of whether the objections raised by other Moved by Lord Grantchester countries that gave rise to our Article XXVIII negotiations 35: After Clause 5, insert the following new Clause— affect the UK’s ability to trade on our goods schedule “Internal energy market after we leave the EU. I hope that I addressed that in It shall be the objective of an appropriate authority to take my previous answer to the noble Baroness, Lady Kramer. all necessary steps to implement an international trade We will be able to use and base our trade policy upon agreement which enables the United Kingdom to fully our goods and services schedules even if they remain participate after exit day in the European Internal uncertified at the point they become operational—whether Energy Market.” 1107 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1108

Lord Grantchester: My Lords, Amendment 35 seeks interest to me, as someone who represented a Scottish to set the objective that the UK should fully participate Borders constituency, that Northern Ireland’s security in the European internal market after exit from the of electricity supply depends on the supply of natural EU. This wording may also need to be examined. gas from Moffat, which is just outside my former However, it is once again merely a probing amendment constituency and supplies 100% of its gas requirements. to enable the Government to provide more clarity on After the UK’s exit from the EU, Northern Ireland their intentions in the Bill and in future scenarios. Full will continue to source 100% of its gas from Great participation may be said to imply continued membership Britain. As a consequence, the integration of the energy in the internal energy market. While the Government market for the Republic of Ireland and Northern have now been clear that leaving the EU will also Ireland now depends on an integrated single electricity include leaving Euratom, they took some time to market. The interconnectedness of energy is something explain what the close relationship with Euratom would that political agreements will have great difficulty mean. We now know that it means full duplication of disentangling. The request for clarity on the current regulations and regimes. However, what is the situation position is very important. It is even more important regarding the internal energy market, and—turning to given that there is now a real prospect of leaving the Amendment 36—how does this outcome bear on the European Union with no agreement. The Government internal all-Ireland energy market? have said in their position paper on Northern Ireland Once again, an industry is calling out for clarity and Ireland that, over trading arrangements as the UK leaves the EU. “the new framework relevant to the energy market in Northern In the event of no deal, the outcomes become even Ireland and Ireland should … facilitate the continuation of a more precarious and pose risks to the functioning of single electricity market covering Northern Ireland and Ireland”. the UK energy market. Energy and climate should be But how this is to be done separate from the European among the first topics covered in negotiations to Union raises significant questions. I hope the Minister preserve security of supply and aid completion of the is able to respond to this. modernisation of the UK’senergy system, which requires The evidence provided by Minister Richard Harrington tens of billions of pounds in investment in a smart to the Lords committee is interesting. He said: power grid, low-carbon transport and heating to underpin “Whether we are in the EU or not in the EU, it is in the the competitiveness of all UK business. Electricity interests of both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland to and gas cross-border trading is an increasingly important continue a shared electricity system … We are held up in sorting part of efficient markets. Net imports of electricity this out only by the progress of the general talks in Europe”. accounted for 4% of the UK’s power supply in 2017 The question mark over where we currently are with and 47% of gas arrives via pipelines from Europe. these general talks in Europe means that it is urgent Increased interconnection and a proposed doubling of that we have clarity on the current position on securing these connectors with neighbouring markets are agreement on a shared electricity system. The real planned—for example, from Peterhead—and will help question in leaving without an agreement with the EU balance the security of power supplies. is whether that raises issues with regard to maintaining the single internal energy market. I am grateful to my noble friend Lord McNicol for tabling his Amendment 36, to which I am also speaking The final point on which I ask for clarification from in this group. It draws attention to the challenges the Minister is that it is not just the operation of the posed by the integration of the island of Ireland’s market on a regulatory basis that is of importance. single electricity market. Also included in this group is The market operates primarily because of the free Amendment 46, which proposes that there should be movement of people and professionals and the regulatory no hard border between Northern Ireland and the systems that surround it. We also know that when it Irish Republic. Will the UK continue to participate comes to the operation of the market there is the through membership of the internal market to avoid jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. What is disruption across both Ireland and the UK and maintain the Government’s position on the jurisdiction of the a low-cost, efficient power supply through integrated legal supervision of how such integrated electricity systems under common international environment laws? markets will operate? Losing access could lead to higher bills for consumers Free movement of people and clarity on jurisdiction and potential disruptive effects, and raise critical issues are core elements of why we believe that moving from regarding the EU emissions trading scheme.It is important the European single market will cause real damage. that the Government provide clarity. I beg to move. The integrated single electricity market is a case study in itself in how it operates effectively at the moment and why question marks over its future need to be 7.15 pm addressed. Clarity, as sought by the amendment, is Lord Purvis of Tweed: I am not speaking on behalf necessary. I hope we can secure it from the Minister’s of my noble friend Lord Teverson, the absolute expert response. on these Benches on these issues, but simply to ask a number of questions in support of those raised by the noble Lord, Lord Grantchester. He rightly points out Lord Hain (Lab): My Lords, it is a pleasure to that one of the core relationships that currently exists follow the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, who made some between Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United important points about the energy market, especially Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland, is energy. It is on the island of Ireland. something that has perhaps not had the same profile Amendment 46 is consistent with the provision of or publicity as border checks, but it is very significant the EU withdrawal Act after a near-identical amendment to consumers on both sides of the Irish Sea. It is of passed by your Lordships’ House was accepted by the 1109 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1110

Government last summer. The central purpose of the by EU laws, covers livestock movement on farms UK’s, Ireland’sand the EU’sshared objective of avoiding straddling the border, food safety, tourism, schools, a hard border is to protect the hard-won peace and colleges, farming, fighting crime, tackling environmental reconciliation. That peace process was begun by the pollution, water quality and supply, waste management, Good Friday agreement of 1998 but is still just that: a GPs, blood transfusions, bus services, train services, process—which is now,I think, sadly in reverse. Although gas supply, electricity supply and so on. it would be wrong to overstate the link between that All those things add up to making life feel normal and recent dissident IRA activity, specifically the car after, just 20 years ago, the Good Friday agreement all bomb in Derry/Londonderry, it does demonstrate the but finished the violence and murder which killed willingness of paramilitaries to exploit the current thousands of people, including many in Britain. The Brexit uncertainty and devolved government limbo to border being invisible today is a big part of that peace undermine the fragile peace, as the noble Lord, process and we must not let Northern Ireland go Lord Empey, said last week in this House. backwards by putting up any new barriers. The border is often described as the Irish border. It It is those very low-level, ordinary aspects of daily is not just that: is the UK’s land border with Ireland life that are the real signs of the precious achievement and the EU. Therefore, it is our responsibility as much of the peace process. Although I strongly reject the as it is Ireland’s and the EU’s. Some 110 million Prime Minister’s deal, I cannot and will not join those person crossings take place over the border every year. attacking what is known as the Irish backstop. Any Northern Ireland, with a population of 1.8 million, Brexit deal of any kind must include this insurance exports £3.4 billion over the border. It is by far its policy or backstop. It is an insurance policy: a rainy-day biggest export destination outside the UK and the back-up plan in the event that a new UK-EU trade first export destination for new and growing enterprises. deal is not ready by the end of 2020—or beyond. It is a At least 5,000 Northern Ireland companies, and probably sensible policy to be used only if needed—and everyone many more, trade with their neighbours over the border. hopes it will not be—to ensure that the border between Tens of thousands of people live on one side and work Northern Ireland and Ireland remains open and invisible. on the other. Supply chains operate across the border without impediment. For instance, each year, more It is not just that Ireland and the EU will not accept than 400,000 lambs and 750 million litres of milk are it any other way; nor should we in the UK. Whatever exported from Northern Ireland to Ireland for processing; happens with Brexit, it is vital we protect what we have 4.6 million heavy goods vehicles and light vans cross achieved together in Northern Ireland in the past 20 to the border every year, along with 22 million cars. 30 years and avoid any hardening of the border in any These crossings take place all along a 300-mile border way. I call on our fellow politicians to stop playing with 300 crossing points. politics with Northern Ireland, as so tragically happened in the House of Commons yesterday, and insist on an A little-noticed document published on 7 December insurance policy regarding the border. We should also by the Department for Exiting the European Union demand an end to attacks on the Irish Government, lists no less than 157 different areas of cross-border who, in insisting on the backstop, are merely fulfilling work and co-operation on the island of Ireland, many their obligations under the Good Friday agreement, as of which have been facilitated by Ireland and the UK’s we in the UK should also be doing. common membership of the EU. Almost every one of those areas concerns people’s everyday lives, and almost The UK and Irish Governments, along with the all are linked to the European Union and Ireland’s EU, were right to prioritise the Irish border in the and the UK’s common membership of it since 1973. Brexit negotiations. Your Lordships’ House has rightly focused on it too, not least because the blunt truth is Life has become pretty normal for most people in that maintaining an open border always was the Achilles Northern Ireland over the past 20 years or so. Like heel of a hard or no-deal Brexit. anyone else in the UK, people there go to jobs near to them or in the next town. They go to doctors, chemists Experts argue that there are four key ingredients and hospitals near to them. They buy local fresh food. for successful border management: first, trust and They use trains, buses and roads to get around. co-operation between authorities and agencies on both sides; secondly, the harmonisation of these agencies’ The difference is that for many in Northern Ireland, approaches; thirdly,the application of common standards the next town can be in a different jurisdiction. If we to minimise the need for checks and controls in the get Brexit wrong, it will cause serious inconvenience first place; and, fourthly, the use of technology to and cost. But for British and Irish citizens living in improve efficiency. Those arguing that technology can Northern Ireland, getting Brexit wrong will bring solve all the Irish border Brexit problems are plain immediate and harsh consequences; many aspects of wrong. It may help, but whether a border is frictionless normal life will be much harder or even impossible. depends on the rules being applied to movement across People live on one side of the border and work on the it being the same either side—it is the rules themselves, other. Because of EU rules that the UK helped to not so much the means used to facilitate enforcement make, cancer care and ambulance services are run of those rules. Yet Brexiteers seem unwilling to jointly across that border. You can get a prescription acknowledge that leaving means a growing divergence on one side and medicines on the other because of of the rules on either side of the border.Their conundrum more EU rules that we share. Cheaper energy and is that divergence is something they favour to build more choice across the island of Ireland again exist their free-trade, deregulated, low-tax nirvana— fantasy, I thanks to those common EU rules. Cross-border work think—otherwise, they argue, what is the point of and co-operation on the island of Ireland, facilitated Brexiting? 1111 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1112

[LORD HAIN] “We would have to negotiate an agreement on customs and The UK and Ireland have their common—I stress, regulations that would mean full alignment so there would be no common—obligations under the Good Friday agreement hard border” to ensure peace, stability and progress. The agreement That is what Amendment 46 is designed to secure, contains two approaches to this that directly affect the in line with both the UK’s responsibility as a guarantor border: intensification of British-Irish and north-south of the Good Friday agreement, and as a nation—so co-operation, and de-securitisation. De-securitisation far, at least—respected for upholding its international meant not only the removal of security installations and bilateral obligations. I hope the Government will but the British Government’s commitment to bringing accept Amendment 46; otherwise, we will need to about measures appropriate to and compatible with vote on it on Report, especially after the dangerous a normal, peaceful society. The last remnants of the torpedo the House of Commons launched last night militarised border were removed only 12 years ago. at the Irish border backstop, the Irish Government It is simply no good politicians or commentators and the Good Friday agreement. saying, “Nobody wants a hard border so there won’t The Minister of State, Department for International be one”. There will be if we do not stop it, because if Development (Lord Bates) (Con): My Lords, I need to we Brexit without a deal or without a backstop, both manage noble Lords’ expectations as to what I am Ireland and the EU will have responsibilities to ensure going to be able to say. The noble Lord, Lord Hain, protection of the single market and customs union. has given a polemic based on his deeply held views on The UK will have its own responsibilities, including the situation in Northern Ireland, born of great experience meeting World Trade Organization requirements, which and service. I do not think I will be able to persuade in turn mean a hard border. him on this issue and Amendment 46, so he will doubtless come back to it on Report. I will, however, 7.30 pm put some important points on the record regarding It goes far beyond customs. A quick glance at the where, as of today, Her Majesty’s Government stand list of areas covered by technical notices for no deal— on these crucial issues. published by the UK, Ireland and the EU—shows The noble Lord, Lord Grantchester, talked about quite how exposed the Irish border region will be. the internal energy market. Again, I have to be careful: Everything from animal breeding standards to VAT I am not able to give him an answer at this stage, vehicle standards will require urgent fixes, and in beyond that set out in the political declaration. I know many cases these cannot be made unilaterally. The UK he has read that carefully, along with the explanatory is disentangling itself from the EU and its legal note; section XI deals with energy co-operation. environment—the very environment that makes the Let me first put some comments on the record border as open as it is, created by common EU rules, about the nature of the internal energy market, and including on customs. Ireland does not have the then I will turn to the single energy market and north-south competence to negotiate separately with the UK on co-operation, addressed by the noble Lord, Lord Purvis. these matters as it no longer has exclusive sovereignty The Government continue to support the development over the things that the backstop covers. The Irish of energy interconnectors—which bring benefits to Government can make some concessions over the countries at both ends of the cables, including improved unique circumstances of the island of Ireland—for security of supply and the lowering of prices for example, hauliers not needing international driving businesses and consumers—and support efforts to licences to work across the Irish border—but these are decarbonise. That is why we set out in the political limited. When it comes to customs and trade and a declaration that both the UK and the EU should wide range of regulatory areas, the decision is not co-operate to support the delivery of cost-efficient, Ireland’s but the EU’s. The consequences of no deal clean and secure supplies of energy and gas, and to are ominously clear. ensure as far as possible that efficient trading over our The chief spokesman for Jean-Claude Juncker, the interconnectors continues. Our aim is to secure the President of the European Commission, spelt this out best possible future arrangements for trade in energy, bluntly last Tuesday week: and which achieve the objectives set out in the declaration, “If you were to push me to speculate on what might happen in to which I referred. a no-deal scenario in Ireland, I think it is pretty obvious you will On the effect of the shared wholesale market, the have a hard border, and our commitments to the Good Friday all-Ireland single electricity market provides significant agreement and everything we have been doing for years with our tools, instruments and programmes will have to take inevitably benefits to consumers and the economy in both Northern into account this fact … So of course we are for peace. Of course Ireland and Ireland, as the noble Lords, Lord Purvis we stand behind the Good Friday agreement, but that is what and Lord Hain, alluded to. It is also an example of no-deal would entail.” north-south co-operation on the island of Ireland. Ireland has avoided talking about what it would do The Government are firmly committed to facilitating in the event of the UK crashing out of the EU, and the continuation of a single electricity market in any Mr Barnier did seek to clarify the spokesman’scomments, EU exit scenario. The agreement reached on the single focusing on the UK’s own responsibilities in the event electricity market annexe, as part of the Northern of no deal or no backstop. The truth is, border controls Ireland and Ireland Protocol to the withdrawal agreement, would be mandatory under both EU and WTO rules—if should ensure that the SEM is maintained. We also we exit without a deal or if there is no backstop. There expect to reach an agreement with the EU on a future can be no cobbled-together, sticking-plaster solution economic partnership that will maintain the SEM to this problem, and the Taoiseach was correct when without engaging the backstop. As set out in a technical he said: note on electricity trading, published in October 2018, 1113 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1114 which the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, referred to, we will It was clear to the Prime Minister, having met take all possible measures to maintain the SEM in the parliamentarians from all parties, that a change to the event that we are unable to reach an agreement. Even backstop would be necessary to get the agreement in this scenario, which I stress— through. The Prime Minister was clear that there are a number of ways to do that and that she will work Lord Purvis of Tweed: Perhaps I might add some with colleagues from all parties, and with the EU, clarification. The Minister has just said that not all to secure changes that command the support of of the Northern Ireland protocol is now up for Parliament. Although the Government will seek to renegotiation—as the Commons have voted for—only secure legal changes to the backstop, their commitment part of it. He said that the energy component of it is to avoiding a hard border and maintaining the necessary going to carry on. So which parts of the backstop are conditions for north-south co-operation remains being renegotiated and which parts are not? undiminished. In a paper published earlier this month, the Lord Bates: I have been on the Front Bench long Government set out their commitments to Northern enough to see a curveball lumbering down the crease. Ireland, including: a legal guarantee that the backstop If the noble Lord will forgive me for not taking a could not be used to alter the scope of north/south swing at it, at such a delicate time, I do that in all co-operation; a role for a restored Northern Ireland seriousness because I want to get the wording precisely Executive in UK-EU discussions, through the Joint right in relation to this. The noble Lord has heard the Ministerial Committee, on matters concerning Northern remarks that I made in relation to the annexe to the Ireland; a commitment to seek the agreement of a restored Northern Ireland protocol, and that is the position. If Northern Ireland Assembly before new areas of EU we have more to say, I will certainly say that ahead of law could be added to the protocol; and a legal guarantee Report, but even in the worst scenario— that Northern Ireland businesses will continue to enjoy unfettered access to the entire UK market. Lord Purvis of Tweed: I did not intend to bowl a Let me be clear: the Government are committed to curveball or even a googly—or anything. It was a ensuring that any arrangements to avoid a hard border genuine point. The Government’s position now is that on the island of Ireland respect the devolution settlement they are seeking to renegotiate the whole protocol, in Northern Ireland. The UK recognises our unique commonly known as the backstop. If that is not the relationship with Ireland. The UK-Ireland relationship case, Parliament needs to know, because we understand should continue to operate through the well-established that the Government are now seeking a renegotiation three-stranded approach set out in the Good Friday of part of the agreement. We know that the European agreement. At this stage, I am unable to add to the Commission has said that this is not up for renegotiation. remarks I have already put on the record, but I thank If the Government are telling the Committee that only noble Lords for the opportunity to make them. I know part of it is being renegotiated, that is really significant, that we will come back to this issue on Report, but in because at the moment we understand that the whole the meantime I hope that the noble Lord will feel able element is being renegotiated. to withdraw his amendment.

Lord Bates: I am happy to put some additional Lord Grantchester: I am grateful to all noble Lords comments on the record for the noble Lord, in that who have contributed to the debate. As the Minister spirit. Last night, the majority of MPs said that they said, this issue relates not only to the energy market would support a deal with changes to the backstop, but to crucial aspects of the UK border on the island combined with measures to address concerns over of Ireland, as spoken to by my noble friend Lord Parliament’s role in the negotiation of the future Hain, whom I thank for his remarks. partnership relationship, and commitments on workers’ Returning to the amendments on energy, I am sure rights. We will now take this mandate forward and that co-operation between industries from member seek to obtain legally binding changes to the withdrawal states will continue on a practical basis, but against agreement that deal with concerns on the backstop the challenges of modernisation with low-carbon while guaranteeing no return to a hard border between energy, a clear commitment from the Government Northern Ireland and Ireland. We are keen to work could settle the issue. Interconnectors are not the with the Government of Ireland to ensure that the only relevant things here, as the internal energy market SEM will continue in any scenario, and welcomed provides challenges to the Government on other aspects, their statement in December that they were engaging such as continued participation in the EU emissions intensively with the EU to ensure that the single trading system. I note that the Minister was most electricity market would continue. I hope that this careful with his words, which the Committee will provides some reassurance. study with interest. I beg leave to withdraw the On the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Hain, amendment. we have been consistent in our commitment to avoiding a hard border between Northern Ireland and Amendment 35 withdrawn. Ireland, upholding the Good Friday agreement and maintaining the conditions for north-south co-operation. We are delivering on those commitments. We negotiated Amendment 36 not moved. a withdrawal agreement that delivered on those commitments in good faith; we have worked hard to House resumed. Committee to begin again not before build support for it in Parliament over many months. 8.43 pm. 1115 Mental Health: Children [LORDS] Mental Health: Children 1116

Mental Health: Children and Young People As well as battling long waiting times, many children Question for Short Debate get lost in the gap between primary care and child and adolescent mental health services. The children who 7.43 pm need these services are often too ill to be dealt with by primary care but not ill enough for CAMHS. Many Asked by Baroness Tyler of Enfield GPs end up referring patients to CAMHS despite Toask Her Majesty’sGovernment what assessment knowing that they will be rejected, but knowing that they have made of the recent concerns expressed by they need more support. According to the British general practitioners that children and young people Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy, as with mental health problems are unable to access many as one in four children were rejected for treatment National Health Service treatments; and what steps last year. Of utmost concern, the children and young they will take to address them. people rejected as “not ill enough”for CAMHS include young people who have self-harmed and others who Baroness Tyler of Enfield (LD): My Lords, there is have experienced abuse. a growing consensus that children’s mental health For many of these children, the only way to access services need to improve radically to address the ever- the care they need is for their mental health to deteriorate increasing incidence of children’s poor mental health. to crisis point or for them to turn to private care. In This matters because poor mental health during fact, almost two-fifths of GPs surveyed said that they childhood shapes the rest of our lives: over half of would recommend patients whose families can afford lifelong mental ill health starts before the age of 14, it to go private. It is completely unacceptable that we and three-quarters by the age of 24. have such a growing divide between those who can pay As has been widely chronicled, mental health problems for treatment and others who are left waiting. among children are on the rise. Recent data from NHS Seventy years after the creation of the NHS, families Digital show that: the prevalence of mental health should not be forced to pay for the mental health care disorders among five to 15 year-olds has risen from that their children so desperately need. one in 10 in 2004 to one in nine in 2017; two-thirds of The problem is indeed stark but what is to be done? five to 19 year-olds with a mental disorder had contact There is a lot to welcome in the NHS Long Term Plan. with a professional in the past year because of worries For example, the new commitment that funding for about mental health, but only a quarter had contact children and young people’s mental health services with a mental health specialist; and the number of will grow faster than overall NHS funding is clearly a referrals to specialist children’s mental health services step in the right direction. However, the plan remains has increased by 26% in the past five years. silent about the current thresholds that need to be met Many of these children receive treatment far too by children presenting with mental health problems. late or, in many cases, not at all. According to a recent Although I welcome the commitments in the plan that report by the University of Birmingham’s Mental 100% of children and young people needing specialist Health Policy Commission, the average wait for children mental health care will be able to access it in the between their first symptoms developing and being coming decade—a far more ambitious target than the able to access support is 10 years. Following referral, 35% access-to-treatment target in the Five Year Forward the Children’s Society estimates that young people View—the reality is that only three in 10 currently wait an average of 58 days until they are assessed, then receive NHS-funded treatment. There is a very long a further 41 days until they begin treatment, although way to go. My overriding point today is: where is the waiting times vary significantly across the country. money and the workforce coming from to achieve the 100% target? There are huge challenges in ensuring In a recent survey, 1,000 GPs expressed their concerns that funding reaches the front line to enable these about access to children’s mental health services. It ambitious targets to be met amid continuing staff found that 78% of GPs were worried that too few of shortages and cuts to children’s social care. their young patients would get treatment for mental ill health, and a staggering 99% of them feared that In summing up the debate, can the Minister set out under-18s would come to harm as a direct result of what steps the Government are taking to ensure that these delays in care. These concerns are not limited to they meet the 10-year target for 100% of children and GPs. According to a YoungMinds survey of more young people who need specialist mental health care than 2,000 parents and carers, three-quarters of them to be able to access it? Can she also outline how said that their child’s mental health had deteriorated progress towards the 10-year target will be measured while they were waiting for support from CAMHS. and reported to Parliament? Indeed, I call on the Despite the clear need for alternative forms of support Government today to ensure that this should take during this waiting time, such as peer support or place at least annually. Will the Minister also commit drop-in facilities, two-thirds said that neither they nor to a timetable for introducing the proposed new four-week their child had been signposted towards any other waiting times for CAMHS services nationally and an sources of support. It is hardly surprisingly, therefore, implementation plan to ensure that these new waiting that a PAC inquiry published earlier this month concluded times do not result in threshold increases? that most young people with a mental health condition The NHS Long Term Plan pledges that children did not get the NHS treatment they needed, and that and young people experiencing a mental health crisis this will be the case for years to come while many face will be able to access the support they need. This is unacceptably long waits. I make no apology for starting welcome since the lack of children’s crisis care is of this debate with rather a lot of statistics because it is escalating concern. A survey of emergency departments vital that the severity of the situation is laid bare. carried out by the Royal College of Emergency Medicine 1117 Mental Health: Children [30 JANUARY 2019] Mental Health: Children 1118 showed that only a third had specialist CAMHS services mental health services actually reaches the front line. I available in the evening and only 27% had such services also call for this to be monitored by the introduction available on weekends. The lack of services means of a strengthened mental health investment standard that, according to a recent “Panorama” programme, for children, with sanctions imposed on those clinical 1.5 million children live in an area without access to commissioning groups which fail to meet the standard 24-hour crisis care. This is totally unacceptable. As without a valid reason. I greatly look forward to with physical health, mental health problems occur at hearing the speeches of other noble Lords, who I all times of the day and night, including at the weekends. know will have much to contribute to this debate. The plan includes a new crisis hotline delivered through NHS 111, training for ambulance staff and other 7.53 pm provisions such as sanctuaries and crisis cafés. However, Baroness Chisholm of Owlpen (Con): My Lords, I it is not clear whether these commitments will be thank the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler, for initiating extended to all children and young people and whether this debate because it is such an important issue, as they will be part of, or separate from, adult services. there seems to be an epidemic of mental health problems Could the Minister clarify these arrangements in her among young people. It is impossible to read or watch reply? the media without seeing and hearing of mental health We all know that workforce is a huge constraint on issues among this group. There are many reasons for progress. The recent Public Accounts Committee report the increase, including poverty, neglect, stress, bullying, found little change in overall mental health workforce poor physical health, social media and trauma. numbers since Future in Mind was published in March Most children attend primary care. Children in the 2015. According to a recent National Audit Office UK see their GP probably on average once a year, report, slow progress on workforce expansion is emerging usually even more often. GPs have an understanding as a major risk to delivering the Government’s ambitions of the context of the issues of the families on their for children’s mental health services. To make the books and they are in a strong position to discover NHS Long Term Plan a reality, the NHS will need to childhood mental health problems, but there are barriers both recruit and retain more staff, attract returners to which more often than not make this a difficult process. the profession, offer rewarding jobs and a more supportive Parents may not realise that their child has a problem. culture, and look at job redesign. This is particularly Their attendance to see the GP may be for a physical pressing given that the number of child and adolescent health reason and, as an appointment usually lasts for psychiatrists working in the NHS in England has only nine minutes, it is clearly difficult for the primary fallen by some 6% in four years. Of course, with Brexit care specialist to get a clear picture in that time. GP looming, the prospect of finding the more than recognition is the key step in assessing specialist services. 23,000 additional staff needed to treat all young people Indeed, GPs are the main referrers to specialist services with mental health problems seems very unlikely. and failure to detect disorders may delay effective Alongside supporting children with pressing mental interventions. Parental perceptions of problems play health problems, it is essential that we take a preventive an important role. Their awareness of a possible mental approach. Schools clearly have a key role to play in health issue is then relayed to the GP, which is a great this.The Government’sGreen Paper,which was published advantage, and we know that GPs’ recognition of a over a year ago, seeks to increase the support available mental health problem increases when parents express within schools through new mental health support concern. There is a need for an awareness campaign teams and a designated senior lead for mental health for parents on the signs of possible mental health in each school. As the Commons Education Select issues, along with increased training for healthcare Committee and Health Select Committee concluded professionals. last May, while laudable, these plans lack ambition The majority of mental health issues start in childhood and the very lengthy implementation, rolling out only so early identification has not only a financial benefit to up to a quarter of the country by the end of 2023, but, much more importantly, the quality of life for the will leave hundreds of thousands of children unable to sufferer is substantially increased. Once an issue has benefit from the proposals for years to come. been picked up there are gaps between mental health The Mental Health Policy Commission at the and childcare services creating a barrier for effective University of Birmingham has found that children help for both children and parents. Services are patchy, with high resilience are half as likely to have a diagnosable with no access to psychiatrists and long waiting lists mental health condition and concluded that early for CBT and counselling. There is a need for a community intervention schemes are greatly cost effective. There psychiatric nurse and a social worker in every practice are many other early intervention approaches which along with an accessible community psychiatrist. There have not been the primary focus of this debate, such as is a requirement for a joined-up approach between the the importance of counselling in schools and other department of health and the Department for Education, community settings, peer support schemes and open where career guidance at schools and colleges can be access drop-in mental health hubs with no waiting lists given to encourage students to go into these professions. of the kind being piloted in some areas, often by the Specialist training for GPs to identify problems, along voluntary sector, which can help to prevent problems with an expansion of primary care-based mental health escalating to the point where specialist mental health services, would clearly relieve the pressure on GPs. treatment is needed. I can only touch on social media, but the Secretary I call on the Government to ring-fence the new of State issued an urgent warning on the potential money announced for mental health in the NHS Long dangers. They cannot be blamed for all mental health Term Plan, so that the much-needed investment in problems, but the platforms have a responsibility to 1119 Mental Health: Children [LORDS] Mental Health: Children 1120

[BARONESS CHISHOLM OF OWLPEN] appropriate to their needs.One young woman, responding sort themselves out along with an awareness campaign to an Association for Young People’s Health survey, for parents on the dangers, signs of problems and safe said: use. Technology can be a force for good but how many “Very often there’s no help available until the problem has more young people must be harmed or die before we become totally unmanageable”. get a grip on the problem? Above all, they want a consistent, sympathetic adult I welcome the Government’s plans for new mental to relate to. health support teams over the next five years working Apart from access to treatment, treatment for children in schools and colleges, bringing early intervention and young people has to be customised. It is simply opportunities along with better information and not acceptable to have under-18s put into treatment data sharing. I also welcome the fact that spending on services designed for adults. Some young people have children and young people’s mental health must very specific needs for mental health, such as in relation increase as a percentage of CCGs’ overall mental to youth justice. A high proportion of young people in health spend. the criminal justice system have mental health problems, As mental health teams are rolled out, we need which may not be addressed and can only get worse. co-ordination with the child health workforce to avoid Services are a vital part of addressing mental health replication of the existing fragmentation, along with needs in the population. I am concerned about funding an increased frequency of data capture and improved at a local level, the co-ordination of services locally transitions from children’s services to those for young and young people having to fill in questionnaire after adults. In the end it comes down to more highly questionnaire for different services. I ask the Minister: trained professionals on the ground, joined-up thinking will the Government be imaginative and forceful in with the Treasury, the department of health and the tackling this issue and encourage dialogue with young Department for Education, leading to more students people and co-ordination between services? training in the required professions. That in turn requires financial backing to make sure that training places are available in all areas of the country. I have run out of 8.01 pm time. The Lord Bishop of Carlisle: My Lords, this is a very timely debate, and I thank the noble Baroness, 7.58 pm Lady Tyler, and congratulate her on securing it. We Baroness Massey of Darwen (Lab): My Lords, I have heard some of the alarming statistics on children thank the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler of Enfield, for and young people with mental health needs, and we initiating this debate. Her concern for the health and know that current NHS services are unable to meet well-being of children and young people is well known, this disturbing increase. In an ideal world, we would and her speech today has confirmed that concern. be asking ourselves why there should be such an I share the anxieties of GPs, many of whom are increase—some of the reasons were mentioned by the struggling to help young people in the face of noble Baronesses,Lady Chisholm and Lady Massey—and extraordinary stresses.Also under stress are services—not doing our best to tackle the causes rather than just only youth services but health, education, social services attend to the consequences. But that is another debate. and the police—and here lies the problem. Young For the moment, I would like to use the brief time people’smental health is rarely sudden or one-dimensional. at my disposal to focus on some of the most vulnerable Mental health issues are embedded in experiences young people in our society: those with moderate to such as poverty and from their contacts with parents, severe learning difficulties, whose mental health needs families, friends, education, youth services, the police can be either missed or inappropriately treated in and health. Youth services are disappearing, while hospitals. I believe that they and many other people many schools are focusing less on activities such as with mental health needs would benefit hugely from sport, music and art as more are driven by an academic the provision of good services in the community rather curriculum which places students under stress. This is than in hospitals or other institutions. I was greatly an issue recently raised by the chief inspector of encouraged to find that the NHS Long Term Plan, Ofsted. Of course GPs and other services are under which we will debate tomorrow, comes to a similar pressure. Will the Minister agree that child mental conclusion in its treatment of this subject, on pages 50 health is the responsibility of a number of agencies to 53. In particular, it emphasises the need to embed and that those agencies, like schools, also need support mental health support for all young people in schools and more emphasis on PSHE programmes, good pastoral and colleges—a strategy that has already been shown care—such as school counsellors—and working together to be therapeutically effective and cost-efficient and to focus on young people? that was mentioned by the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler. Two years ago in Portcullis House, I facilitated a We also know that a lack of good support for Council of Europe-UK Parliament seminar on child children with learning disabilities and behavioural mental health and child-friendly justice, with young challenges can lead to crises in families and a lifetime people aged 14 to 23 and many NGOs. Children and of restrictive, high-cost, often residential treatments young people were listened to and consulted respectfully. for individuals when they become adults. The charity They were clear and articulate in their concerns about Mencap is deeply concerned about this and reports services and could identify factors that had gone that, over the last few years, the number of children wrong for them, now and when they were younger. with learning disabilities admitted to mental health Their main complaint was that services were too hospitals has gone up rather than down. Between little and too late. They wanted services that were March 2015 and May 2018, the number of children 1121 Mental Health: Children [30 JANUARY 2019] Mental Health: Children 1122 under 18 in in-patient mental health units doubled, that organisations such as the excellent YoungMinds from 110 to 250. There were another 465 young people are the safety net when the NHS, and particularly aged between 18 and 24 in in-patient units last year. CAMHS, fails to catch young people. The average length of stay has remained the same, at However, at the very least, the NHS is to be 5.4 years, since 2013. These figures contrast rather congratulated on much better provision of data from starkly with the laudable and ambitious Building the April 2016 on mental health provision. As this was Right Support campaign launched by NHS England mentioned in Oral Questions this afternoon, I spent in October 2015. Its aim was to close up to half of the some time looking at the monthly statistics and learned in-patient beds across the country for people with a that 600,000 mental health service appointments for learning disability and to ensure that local areas develop children in the year to 30 October were unfulfilled, the right community support by March this year. To which means patients did not show up. Will my noble date, only about 20% of those in-patient beds have friend the Minister assure us that steps will be taken to been closed, and I have already referred to the way in improve this statistic? which local community mental health services are I turn to my main point. Preventing problems from severely overstretched. emerging in the first place must be the best way to ease In other words, as we have already heard, we have a the pressure on services. Early intervention is also long way to go before the good aspirations of the more compassionate, as it reduces distress and prevents NHS Long Term Plan for all young people with mental people reaching a crisis point. The big gains in protecting health needs—and those with learning disabilities in and improving mental health are to be had in our particular—will remotely be achieved. Given the urgency schools, communities, workplaces and, generally, the of the current situation, I would be most grateful if non-clinical spaces where we spend most of our time. the Minister would comment on the proposed timeframe There are some programmes that are helping to take for closing beds in institutions and making sure that the challenge on. The Mental Health Foundation’s effective mental health support for children and young Peer Education Project is a good example. people is available in all our communities. To make a real difference to the mental health of children and young people, we need to reach children 8.06 pm before they need services and there needs to be better Lord Leigh of Hurley (Con): My Lords, I also support for those who do not reach the diagnostic congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler of criteria for CAMHS. I have to agree with the Mental Enfield, on securing this debate. I think it is almost Health Foundation when it calls for greater attention four years to the day since we last debated this subject to be paid to early intervention and prevention and for in your Lordships’ House, and I read the speech the investment of more resources in this area. the noble Baroness gave then with great care. She commented then on the need for much greater awareness 8.09 pm of the issues and recognised the commitment to Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe (Lab): My Lords, I too parity of esteem for physical and mental health, thank the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler of Enfield, for which of course is now enshrined in legislation—they this debate on access to NHS treatments for children do listen to us sometimes. No doubt this debate was in and young people with mental health problems. Doctors the Chancellor’s mind when in his last Budget he on the front line have long complained about the dire announced that funding for mental health services will situation and inadequate resources. This in itself is a grow as a share of the overall NHS budget for the next massive issue. It is placing ever-increasing demands on five years. already stretched services. Although I have not spoken on this or related Let us put ourselves in the shoes of a child encountering matters regularly in this House, it is an area of interest these services, possibly for the first time, at hospital to me. Until recently, I was a trustee of Jewish Care, A&E units. A child experiencing a mental health crisis which incorporates Jami, the mental health service for out of hours—perhaps a looked-after child having the Jewish community. More recently, my wife and I difficulty adjusting to their new surroundings or have tried to spend some time helping mental health having an argument with a parent—and brought to charities such as the Mental Health Foundation. A&E by their guardian as the only safe place to seek The Government have, of course, committed to assistance often has real difficulties. Self-harm is provide an extra £20.5 billion to the NHS by 2023-24 often a coping mechanism to which they turn in this and have introduced the first ever mental health waiting kind of situation. It is not an unusual occurrence and targets. The NHS Long Term Plan in England addresses once the child has, in many cases reluctantly, been some of the gaps in the Five Year Forward View for brought to A&E they will often have to wait for Mental Health, and it is particularly encouraging to hours to see a member of the psychiatry liaison team, see a greater emphasis on perinatal mental health care which is already stretched to full capacity seeing services. the adults they are more properly equipped to It is true, as the aforementioned YoungMinds has manage. In most cases the healthcare professional will claimed, that many local health bodies are diverting not have the expertise to manage the situation with the some of the new funding they have received for children’s child given that most psychiatry liaison staff are not mental health to other priorities and that, while some trained in child mental health. NICE guidelines CCGs have made big increases in their spending, recommend that they then have to admit the child many others are using some of the new money to overnight until the appropriate team member can come backfill cuts or to spend on other priorities. It seems to the A&E. 1123 Mental Health: Children [LORDS] Mental Health: Children 1124

[LORD BROOKE OF ALVERTHORPE] hospital and while the care team were trying desperately Imagine then that this is a Friday night and the every day and ringing round for beds—which is what team member will not be available until Monday morning. they have to do rather than caring for other children—she I am advised that this is not a rare event and often was left there for nearly a month. When a bed became happens in A&E. Staff are dissatisfied, A&E departments available, it was more than 100 miles away from her are dissatisfied, as are the children and their parents. home. With eating disorders you are not talking about Where are we going with all this without the appropriate children being in in-patient facilities for weeks; you are resources to address the growing number of children talking about months and months. If she had been a with mental health problems turning up at A&E? child with a physical illness, that would not have been Again considering this same child, once the assessment acceptable. We need more specialists in eating disorder hurdle has been surmounted the challenge remains of facilities, and we need them now. accessing the necessary service required. With an increase It is welcome that the NHS Long Term Plan, at in referrals of 26% over the past five years this has paragraph 3.26, refers to additional investment being stretched resources to the limits. Worryingly, however, made in this area. When will further information be parents questioned for a recent YoungMinds survey given about the size of that investment, and can the reported that this intervening period between the first Minister clarify that it will be ring-fenced for eating referral and acceptance on to the clinician’s caseload disorders? can be a risky time, with 75% reporting that their The second point I wish to raise is around waiting children’s mental health had deteriorated further while times. It is fortunate for children and young people waiting for the services to be given to them. In fact, the who need to be referred to eating disorder services that longer they were left to wait the more likely it was, the there are waiting times in place. We are aiming to get parents said, that the mental health of their child to 90% by 2020—we are around 80% at the moment—and would deteriorate even further. There are many cases where I live in Surrey I am pleased to say that the CCG where people had waited up to six months and some has found £1 million to improve the waiting times for had waited up to a year. access to treatment. However, there are huge variations As many as three-quarters of those surveyed reported around the country, as my noble friend Lady Tyler that they were not signposted to any other service mentioned. What will the Government do to address during the time they were waiting for the appointment, the huge variations in waiting times for children and so during this period the child’s mental health will young people suffering from eating disorders? almost invariably deteriorate, possibly leading to self- As I said at the beginning, these are the most deadly harming, dropping out of school or having suicidal of all mental health illnesses and we know that early thoughts which they might act on. The parents’ mental treatment for children is critical, as it is for other health may also be impacted on with the stress that mental health illnesses, as other noble Lords have said. they suffer during this period. What may begin as a Early treatment is essential and we need that money. I seemingly relatively minor mental health crisis—perhaps therefore ask the Minister to explain when we will get an argument with parents or something like that—has clarity about the amount of money that is going to the capacity to escalate into an issue which becomes children and young people’s eating disorder services pervasive in all aspects of the patient’s life or, worse and what the Government are going to do about the still, lead to something worrying, such as thoughts geographical variations in waiting times access. about suicide and ill health later in life. This lack of signposting further compounds GPs’ 8.17 pm fears about a patient’s interaction with mental health services. They feel that there is little else that can be Baroness Wyld (Con): My Lords, I shall try to make offered. However, we now have of course the new four points in four minutes. The first point is about 24-hours-a-day crisis hotline, which through phoning funding. At the moment we are often working backwards, 111 can triage children and young people. Let us hope as other noble Lords have said, to help those who are that this will make a significant change. already at crisis point. The Government have shown Yes, we have more money coming in, which is great leadership on this—I welcome the additional welcome—the Government are moving in the right funding—but I am still extremely worried when consultant direction—but we need to know when the training is psychiatrists and others in the system to whom I have going to start to find the extra staff needed. Perhaps spoken say that the extra investment is not getting to the Minister will address that issue. the front line for specialist services. I am not someone who thinks that public spending is the answer to every problem, but sometimes a big part of the problem 8.14 pm simply does come down to money, and this is one of Baroness Parminter (LD): My Lords, I wish to them. I back up the point made by the noble Baroness, focus my remarks on children and young people suffering Lady Tyler, on this and ask my noble friend the from eating disorders, which are the most deadly of all Minister how the mental health investment standard, mental health illnesses and which are affecting a rising which is excellent, will help to make absolutely sure number of young girls and boys. that funding is targeted at the services most under I shall use the illustration of one young teenager strain, particularly specialist CAMHS. suffering from anorexia to highlight the historic My second point is about early interventions and I underfunding in this area. When she got to crisis point will be brief. School counselling services clearly can last year and required in-patient care, no beds were play an important role in preventing mental distress available. She was put on a general ward in the local from escalating. I have seen some brilliant examples in 1125 Mental Health: Children [30 JANUARY 2019] Mental Health: Children 1126 schools. Even at primary school level, if you put 8.21 pm yourselves in the shoes of a child, that is still quite a Lord Bradley (Lab): My Lords, I also congratulate late intervention. I agree with the point made by my the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler of Enfield, on securing noble friend and I urge the Government to keep up the this very timely debate. I also declare my health and momentum on helping families—and I stress families—in education interests, as in the register. In the short time the peri and post-natal stages. available I shall touch on three issues: funding, workforce We need to be careful about a narrative where we and crisis care, which GPs have raised many times think that A plus B will definitely prevent C. It will with me. not, unfortunately.We should look at early intervention but some children will end up in crisis. Mental health First, in the NHS Five Year Forward View the NHS illnesses can strike out of the blue and we need to budget was about £120 billion but mental health received make sure that each part of the system works properly. only 15% of the total. As we know, one in four people will suffer some form of mental health problem during My third point is about culture change. I spend a their lives and, critically,children’s mental health services great deal of time talking to people about this. I know receive only about 7% of the 15%, which is totally that some people worry that we are medicalising normal unacceptable. There is growing evidence that there is a childhood or adolescent experience, as if by encouraging huge rise in the prevalence of poor mental health, young people to talk about their mental health we are particularly among young women over the last decade, somehow putting ideas in their heads and stimulating and a much faster rise in help-seeking and referrals to a false demand that should not be there and that we specialist CAMHS services. cannot address. The 10-year plan pledges that funding for children This shows that as a society we are on such a steep and young people’s mental health will rise faster than learning curve—that, unbelievably, we are still at an the average for the NHS and by more than it will for early stage of understanding mental well-being and, at adult mental health services. Can the Minister indicate the same time, we are trying to teach our children. For today the profile of this funding escalation up to 2023? me, it is the very opposite of creating epidemics of Unless it is honoured, the thresholds for access to mental illness—it is about stopping them, by teaching services, which GPs are so concerned about, will continue children that anxious or unhappy feelings at certain to rise. times are normal, but they need to be given tools to manage them. We talk a lot at the moment about what Further, as has been mentioned, GPs have raised sort of a country we want to be. I want my children to concernsthatfundingallocationstoclinicalcommissioning grow up in a society where all those who are able to be groups have not always been spent on mental health are in control of their own mental well-being. Philip services but have sometimes been used to cover deficits Larkin famously said that: elsewhere in the system. This,again, is totally unacceptable. Can the Minister give further details of the mechanisms “Man hands on misery to man”, that will be employed to deliver the 10-year plan’s and while he is my favourite poet, I have never particularly commitment to ensure that local NHS commissioners liked that poem. There is always a chance to break are held to account for the increases in funding for cycles and hand on resilience rather than misery. mental health services? My last point is about joined-up government. There Secondly, to deliver the ambitions of the 10-year are so many other points I would have liked to have plan for mental health it is crucial that a robust and covered—I am running out of time—including the imaginative new workforce plan is published. As we new Ofsted framework, transition to adult services have heard, the Royal College of Psychiatrists has and welfare reform. In broad terms I am delighted to pointed out that one in 10 consultant psychiatrist see that the Government have moved to a birth-to-25 posts is vacant and the latest training programme strategy, but how will this be led across government data shows that 60% of training places for child and departments in practice? When I talk to people in adolescent psychiatrists are unfilled. The Royal College Whitehall they emphasise how complicated this is, of Paediatrics and Child Health, the Royal College of with many root causes and considerations. Because General Practitioners and the Royal College of that is true, it is the very reason that cross-government Psychiatrists have highlighted that currently under working needs to be gripped. Every person at every half of GPs have received mental health training, level working on this should understand which while 82% of practice nurses feel ill-equipped to deal interventions are intended to solve which problems, with mental health problems. Yet 90% of people with where responsibility lies and how success will be measured. mental health problems are served in primary care We should be following the life of a child, not the silos settings. Can the Minister tell us when the new workforce of departments. plan will be published? Many of us were disappointed Finally, at my daughters’ school they often sing a that it was not published at the same time as the song from “Matilda The Musical”. It is called “When 10-year plan. I Grow Up”. One of the closing lines is: Thirdly, and quickly, from my own work on the “Just because I find myself in this story, it doesn’t mean that development of liaison and diversion services, I am everything is written for me”. well aware that it is essential that children in crisis When I watch the kids I often remember the most need to be assessed and supported in an appropriate harrowing calls I took as a Samaritan volunteer over a setting. Police cells have now been banned for the decade ago from children who simply had nowhere assessment of children who find themselves in some else to turn. Sometimes children need help to write a way connected with the criminal justice system but better story. That is our job. A&E departments can be equally inappropriate and a 1127 Mental Health: Children [LORDS] Mental Health: Children 1128

[LORD BRADLEY] that is, the PAC— very poor environment for proper assessment. It is “what arrangements are in place to collect the data it needs to: set obviously welcome that the 10-year plan recognises up a robust baseline, and monitor progress on children and young this and the importance of investment in community- people’s mental health services in the ten-year plan … reliably based crisis response services, and commits to ensuring measure patient outcomes; and fully evaluate … the Green Paper that children and young people experiencing crisis will pilot areas to inform the national roll-out of services, including be able to access crisis care 24 hours a day, seven days information from outside the NHS”. a week. Can the Minister indicate the timescale for the That is by April, which is two months away. Are the delivery of that? Government on track to achieve that? Finally, it is essential that we have a spread of in-patient beds across the country for people who need 8.30 pm them, in their localities and not some distance away. Baroness Manzoor (Con): My Lords, I start by thanking the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler,for introducing 8.25 pm this debate and for giving us the opportunity to discuss a very important issue. I know that she is a great Baroness Thornton (Lab): My Lords, I declare my campaigner on this issue. Regrettably, it remains true interest, as in the register, as a lay member of a CCG. I that many young people who seek help find it difficult congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler,on bringing to access the right support at the right time, as she has us this debate. I know that we had a slightly false start clearly identified. getting here but we are here. The fact that so many I also thank all other noble Lords for their contributions noble Lords put their names down to speak in this to this incredibly important debate.As the noble Baroness, debate, meaning we have only a few minutes each, Lady Thornton, said, there certainly is not sufficient shows that this is seen as an important issue across the time to address all the very important issues that have House and that many of us are very concerned about been raised today in the four minutes that Back-Benchers the mental health of our children and young people. have been given to speak. I thank YoungMinds, Beat and the Royal College I reassure my noble friends Lady Wyld and of Paediatrics and Child Health for their briefings. Lady Chisholm and the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler, I also thank the Library. Like many noble Lords, I that this Government are committed to ensuring clicked on the links in the Library briefing and suddenly that our children and young people, and their realised that they showed the journey we have been on families, get the support they need at the right time for the last few years with some excellent reports that from the NHS, schools, colleges, local authorities and have been there for five or six years. The House of our dedicated partners in the voluntary sector. As Commons Public Accounts Committee published its part of this long-standing commitment, we have report in January. The Stem4 GP survey was published already laid strong foundations for a step change in in December 2018. There was the excellent briefing the quality and scale of support available through from the House of Commons Library on children and improving and expanding NHS mental health services young people’s mental health services. The National for children and young people, and through the Audit Office published Improving Children and Young 2015 Future in Mind strategy, the 2016 five-year forward People’s Mental Health Services last October. The view for mental health and the NHS Long Term Plan, Care Quality Commission’s Are We Listening? A Review published earlier this month, as noble Lords have of Children and Young People’s Mental Health Services identified. was published in March last year. There were debates I say to the noble Baronesses, Lady Tyler and in both Houses all the way through last year, averaging Lady Massey, and other noble Lords that we know about one every couple of months or so. There was the that the current system is not perfect but we are National Health Service’s five-year forward plan, a working tirelessly to improve the quality and availability publication on mental health well-being trends and of support for children. This will take time. The noble so on. Baroness,Lady Massey,rightly identified that collaborative I asked myself what the common thread running working across the system is key to ensuring that we through all this was. It is the recommendations that get it right. noble Lords have highlighted in today’s debate. It I am grateful that noble Lords have recognised the really is time to stop talking and to start delivering. additional funding going into mental health services. When will the number of weeks that children and As my noble friend Lady Chisholm noted, after years young people are having to wait be reduced, by how of underinvestment, NHS funding for children’s and much, and by what date? In a child’s life, 26 weeks is a young people’s mental health services is now rising huge amount of time and has devastating effects. My and will continue to rise as we work towards the goals noble friend Lord Brooke and the noble Baroness, set out in the NHS Long Term Plan. Lady Wyld, mentioned this. This seems to me to be a I reassure my noble friend Lady Wyld that mental priority. When will the workforce be increased? The health services will grow faster than the overall NHS figure of an additional 4,500 was mentioned in the budget, creating a new ring-fenced local investment House of Commons PAC report of last December. fund worth at least £2.3 billion a year by 2023-24. In Are the Government on track to deliver those relatively addition, the plan includes a new commitment that modest figures? funding for children’s and young people’s mental Finally, the last recommendation in the PAC report health services will grow faster than both overall reads as follows: NHS funding and total mental health spending. This “By April 2019, the NHS should set out to the Committee”— transformative investment will mean that by 2023-24 1129 Mental Health: Children [30 JANUARY 2019] Mental Health: Children 1130 an extra 345,000 children and young people up to the colleges and schools. This commitment was confirmed age of 25 will receive mental health support via NHS- in the NHS Long Term Plan and will be rolled out to funded mental health services. between one-fifth and a quarter of the country by the I say to the noble Baroness, Lady Parminter, that end of 2023. we recognise that the standard of service provision This new schools-based service is in addition to varies for children and young people around the country, existing provision for children and young people with and I acknowledge the arguments that she has made. mental health needs. Last month we announced An increasing proportion of young people are seeking 25 trailblazer sites, which will run the first wave of help from the NHS. We are responding by already mental health support teams. Twelve of those sites will ramping up capacity, and the NHS Long Term Plan also test a four-week waiting time for children and has set out further priorities for the years ahead. young people to get mental health support from the NHS. I hope that the noble Baroness, Lady Thornton, is The workforce is, of course, integral to everything reassured that we are on track to meet our commitment we are doing. I agree with the noble Lords, Lord Brooke to improve access. By 2020-21, 70,000 more children and Lord Bradley, on the issues that they raised. We and young people will be accessing treatment each have always recognised that a skilled and confident year. This equates to 35% of children and young workforce is at the heart of delivering improvements people with a mental health condition. to mental health services. That is why we have set an ambition to create 21,000 new posts in the mental I say to the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler,the noble Lord, health workforce in priority growth areas to be occupied Lord Brooke, and the noble Baroness, Lady Parminter, by 19,000 NHS staff. The Children and Young People’s that we have introduced the first ever access and Improving Access to Psychological Therapies programme waiting standards for mental health services, as they has trained both new and existing staff in evidence-based acknowledged, including two relevant to children and therapies. Our ambition is to have 1,700 newly trained young people—on eating disorders and on early therapists working in children’s mental health services intervention for people experiencing a first episode of and 3,400 existing mental health staff trained in evidence- psychosis. Indeed, we have a target to ensure that based interventions by 2021. treatment begins within two weeks for more than 50% of people experiencing their first episode of psychosis. As the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler, and the right Nationally, the NHS is exceeding the target, with reverend Prelate the Bishop of Carlisle said, some 78.5% of patients having started treatment within two children will, unfortunately, experience a mental health weeks by October 2018. crisis and will need rapid mental health support. I want to thank the noble Baroness for contacting my noble More young people are getting the treatment that friend Lord O’Shaughnessy on this important matter they need for eating disorders, and there has been a last month, when he was the Minister. Like the noble significant improvement in treatment times for NHS Baroness and the right reverend Prelate, I am pleased care. An extra £30 million is going into children’s with the strong focus on crisis care in the NHS Long eating disorder services every year, with 70 new or Term Plan, which sets out around £250 million of expanded community-based teams covering the whole investment in crisis care by 2023-24. of the country. We are nationally on track to meet the Improving provision of children’s and young people’s target of 95% of children and young people with an urgent and emergency mental health care is a priority eating disorder accessing treatment with a one-week for NHS England as part of the wider transformation referral for urgent cases and four weeks for routine of mental health support. We have supported the cases by 2020-21. The most recent data shows that development of children’s and young people’s urgent 80.2% of young people started treatment for a routine and emergency mental health care services and intensive case within four weeks. community support services, including testing and The noble Baronesses, Lady Tyler, Lady Massey evaluating models for crisis support. The NHS Long and Lady Thornton, and my noble friends Lady Chisholm Term Plan is clear that the expansion of age-appropriate and Lady Wyld also noted the importance of recognising crisis care services for children and young people is that there is no single defined service or model that vital, and I share that view. can address the needs of all ages and developmental I am conscious that I have only two minutes left, needs across mental health, and that existing services but there are lots of questions to which I want to give will need to work together. I am of course in total answers—I have been told to keep going. agreement. An example of how this Government are encouraging Baroness Vere of Norbiton (Con): Four minutes. partnership working between services is the Green Paper on children’s and young people’s mental health, Baroness Manzoor: I have four minutes; that is good. which will deliver a new schools and college-based I shall answer some specific questions. The noble service to help children and young people and will be Baroness, Lady Tyler, asked how the target in the staffed by a new workforce. This brings together health long-term plan of 100% access would be measured. The and education to provide early intervention mental NHS will publish further details about how the long-term health support for children, as advocated by the right plan will be taken forward, in an implementation plan reverend Prelate. Weare taking cognisance of preventive due this spring, with more detailed plans in the autumn. services for mental health, which is key and fundamental. She also asked about the timetable for introducing the Every school will be encouraged to have a designated four-week waiting time. As she may know, we have senior lead for mental health, as well as access to recently announced 12 areas that will test how we mental health support teams that will sit in and around might introduce the four-week waiting time without 1131 Mental Health: Children [LORDS] Trade Bill 1132

[BARONESS MANZOOR] (2) A bilateral system of civil judicial co-operation under the risk of perverse incentives, such as raising thresholds. subsection (1) shall include agreed conditions on— Fuller plans will then be drawn up, informed by learning (a) jurisdiction, including applicable law and choice of from those pilots. jurisdiction; and The right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Carlisle (b) bilateral enforcement and recognition of judgments.” asked about better community service and support for Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames (LD): My Lords, those with learning disabilities. I agree that we need Amendment 37 in my name and that of the noble to increase community services, particularly for those Lord, Lord McNicol of West Kilbride, would make it with learning disabilities. That is why the long-term the objective of an appropriate authority to secure a plan’s significant investment in children’s mental health bilateral system of civil judicial co-operation between services is so crucial. As I said, by 2024 an additional the UK and the European Union, to include arrangements 345,000 children will receive this support. for the choice of jurisdiction, the choice of law and the My noble friend Lord Leigh and the noble Lord, bilateral enforcement and recognition of judgments. Lord Bradley, also raised the issue of CCGs perhaps The amendment is relevant to the Bill in at least diverting funding for mental health services to other three ways: first, to new free trade agreements with things. I reassure them—and the noble Baroness, third countries that currently enjoy FTAs with the EU, Lady Thornton, who will probably know more, because and therefore with us through the EU; secondly, to she sits on the board of a CCG—that in 2017-18, bilateral FTAs with third countries that might enter 90% of CCGs met the mental health investment such agreements with us in the expectation of further standard, which requires them to increase funding for trade through the UK with the EU member states; mental health at least in line with their overall financial and, thirdly, in the event of no deal, when, as the noble allocation. Lord, Lord Hannay, pointed out earlier, the Bill—which I can tell the noble Lord, Lord Brooke, and others will then be an Act—after exit day will be the only who raised crisis care and A&E that we are committed legislation bearing upon the arrangement of future FTAs. to rolling out liaison mental health services to every In moving the amendment, we have every reason to A&E by 2021. The long-term plan builds on this by believe that we are pushing at an open door.In debate after committing to 70% of these teams meeting the “core 24” debate since the 2016 referendum, mine has been just standard by 2024. We are committed to developing one of many voices arguing that if we leave the EU we alternatives to hospital. must maintain the whole gamut of the arrangements I have already addressed the issues around eating for cross-border judicial co-operation that we presently disorders. Of course, it is vital that we continue to enjoy as a member of the EU.Every time,the Government build on the good progress that has been made. More have responded that they recognise and will maintain details of the implementation plan will be available in the benefits of these arrangements for the United the spring. Kingdom. Only yesterday we considered SIs laid by To conclude, we are aware that there is much work the Government on this topic. The noble and learned to be done, but I am enormously proud of the work Lord, Lord Keen, was very clear that the SIs were laid that the Government are doing to improve access to only against the undesirable possibility of a no-deal mental health services, ensuring that many more Brexit, and accepted that should that occur we would children and young people can access high-quality be losing a significant benefit; I refer to columns vital mental health support. I am confident that GC 231 and GC 233 in yesterday’s Hansard. We would by continuing record levels of investment, improving be forced to fall back on less effective, more costly, access and waiting times, and championing parity of extremely inconvenient and altogether inferior alternative esteem through high-quality mental health support arrangements. services, we will provide a brighter and healthier future Whatever outcome emerges from the current impasse, for our children and young people. They deserve we should do all we can to replicate all the arrangements nothing less. for civil and commercial cases that we currently enjoy. These stem largely from the Brussels regime and its provision for the determination of jurisdiction and for Trade Bill the mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments. Committee (3rd Day) (continued) The Brussels regime principally comprises the Brussels Ia EU regulation and is supplemented by the 2007 Lugano Convention, which provides similar arrangements for 8.44 pm Norway, Switzerland, Iceland and Denmark. Choice of law in contract cases, which make up the vast bulk Amendment 37 of commercial litigation, is governed largely by the Moved by Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames Rome I regulation, and Rome I applies throughout the EU except in Denmark, which has an opt-out for 37: After Clause 5, insert the following new Clause— judicial co-operation. “Bilateral system of civil judicial cooperation If we failed to replicate the arrangements of the (1) It shall be the objective of an appropriate authority to Brussels regime, what we would lose is well summed take all necessary steps to implement an international up in two bullet points in the Explanatory Memorandum trade agreement which enables the United Kingdom, after exit day, to fully participate in a bilateral system of to yesterday’s SI on civil jurisdiction and judgments. civil judicial co-operation for the purposes of facilitating The first refers to, trade between the United Kingdom and the European “a system of uniform jurisdictional rules to identify the appropriate Union. court in which to bring a civil or commercial claim”. 1133 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1134

The second refers to, the contribution which UK law has made to the “a simplified mechanism to recognise and enforce the judgments commercial contract area and the success of trade and of EU Member State/EFTA state courts in civil and commercial financial services. cases, with a view to reducing costs for litigants and increasing We have long made clear our intention to negotiate efficiency. The possibility for such simplified and almost automatic a new relationship with the EU which covers civil treatment of the judgment of one such state in another is based on the ‘mutual trust’ that each state will have applied the uniform judicial co-operation. The political declaration provides rules of jurisdiction”. a positive means for discussion on this. It makes it These arrangements have been built up over decades clear that the UK and EU have agreed to explore a and British lawyers, jurists and judges have played a bilateral arrangement on matrimonial and parental major part in their development. The European Judicial responsibility and other related matters. This goes Network in civil and commercial matters, established further than the arrangements that the EU currently in 2001 by the European Council, is an important has with any other third country to date. forum for cross-border co-operation between courts The UK also remains committed to future co-operation across the EU. It seems to me that there is no significant on civil and commercial matters with the EU—recognising reason why we should not be able to negotiate some that this is in both our interests, for the reasons the continued access to the European Judicial Network noble Lord, Lord Marks, set out—and to similar after we leave the EU. co-operation with other international partners. In this Throughout the European Union, citizens and area, the UK will, as a minimum, continue to prioritise businesses now know where cross-border disputes are joining Hague 2005 in our own right and seek also to to be determined. They know what law is to be applied. accede to the Lugano Convention. The UK will engage Crucially, they can be confident that court orders with EU partners to ensure that these important issues, obtained in one member state will be recognised and which provide vital protections for citizens, are the enforced without fuss, delay or extra proceedings focus of detailed negotiations with the EU. throughout the Union. This system has been of On the specific issues which the noble Lord referred incalculable benefit not just to those who use our legal to, co-operation in this area makes clear that the UK system but to our economy as a whole, because it is and EU have agreed to explore a bilateral arrangement widely understood that all member states respect the on aspects of law.This goes further than any arrangements arrangements and decisions of courts in other member that the EU currently has with a third country. The states. UK also remains committed to international co-operation in future. It often seems to me—I hope I can say this as a lawyer without special pleading—to be largely overlooked The noble Lord asked what would happen in the that our legal system has contributed significantly to event of no deal. As a responsible Government, we are Britain’s commercial success during the decades of preparing for all outcomes,hence the statutory instruments our EU membership. One reason the United Kingdom debated in Grand Committee yesterday.Wehave published has been so successful in attracting both inward investment a dedicated technical notice for civil judicial co-operation, from outside the EU and trade from elsewhere within detailing how the rules would change in the event that the EU has been the fact we have not just excellent we cannot reach a deal. This is not our preferred financial services and a sophisticated financial outcome—we remain focused on getting a deal that architecture—another plus is sometimes said to be works for the UK and the EU. The rules on civil political stability but I somehow doubt that at the judicial co-operation rely on reciprocity. After exit, moment—to add to the benefits of the English language even if the UK were to apply these rules unilaterally, and a convenient time zone, but a well-respected there would be no requirement on EU member states commercial legal system, one that functions without to apply the same rules in the UK. Without the guarantee undue delays and at cost levels that are reasonably of reciprocity, our broad approach is to repeal existing competitive in the international market, and which EU instruments and revert to applying the rules which produces outcomes that are relatively predictable and the UK currently applies in relation to non-EU matters. generally accepted. I am grateful to the noble Lord for raising this A very important component of that success is that important matter, and I hope that I have provided as our legal system functions internationally in supporting much reassurance as I am able to at this stage. cross-border trade and international commerce. If we lose that, however frictionless we may make our trading Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames: My Lords, I am arrangements, we will have compromised our future grateful to the Minister for his response, and I will be both as a destination for international investment, withdrawing the amendment, with your Lordships’ attracted to the United Kingdom as a gateway to the leave. The plain fact is that the arrangements the European Union, and as a trading partner for member Government have in mind in the event of no deal are states of the EU and the EEA. Put shortly, at a time of what I described yesterday as “thin gruel indeed” major upheaval, we will have needlessly thrown away a compared with what we have. They are inferior, bitty significant competitive advantage. That is something and involve a great deal of scope for satellite litigation we cannot afford to do and it would be folly indeed. I where parties are having to litigate on issues such as beg to move. enforcement and jurisdiction in different jurisdictions. This is so important because it highlights an area The Minister of State, Department for International which has had far too little attention in the event of no Development (Lord Bates) (Con): I thank the noble deal. It is a significant danger for us—no deal will Lord, Lord Marks, for moving this amendment and deprive us of the competitive advantage we enjoy as a raising this very important issue. He is right to highlight member of the EU. 1135 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1136

[LORD MARKS OF HENLEY-ON-THAMES] is a good thing. If the Minister could helpfully accept I share the Minister’s confidence that, in the event all the other amendments in this group and add them that we secure an agreement, we will also secure an to the Bill, we could move on rather swiftly. However, agreement on judicial co-operation during a transitional unfortunately, I do not think it will be quite that period, because it is in the EU’s interests as well as simple, so I will raise a few more points before passing ours. The danger is that people float into no deal by on to others. accident, and cost us everything involved in losing Amendment 39 deals with the mutual recognition judicial co-operation. It is a significant feature that of qualifications—again, a sensible approach to how ought to weigh heavily in the minds of all the policymakers we progress through Brexit. The amendment covers involved. With that warning, I beg leave to withdraw many vital roles: nurses, midwives, doctors, vets and the amendment. architects, to name but a few. If we leave without a deal, no reciprocal recognition of professional Amendment 37 withdrawn. qualifications or experience will exist between the UK and the remaining European Economic Area states. Amendment 38 While Her Majesty’s Government and the European Moved by Lord McNicol of West Kilbride Union are negotiating a withdrawal agreement, if a deal cannot be reached there will be significant implications 38: After Clause 5, insert the following new Clause— for those who work in Europe and in the UK. To give “UK participation in Common Transit Convention noble Lords one example, UK-qualified architects It shall be the objective of an appropriate authority to who wish to be able to practise in the remaining EEA achieve before exit day the implementation of an states after 29 March are being directed to contact the international agreement to enable the United Kingdom to participate in the Common Transit Convention after host state regulators of the country they wish to exit day.” practise in to seek clarity on the respective states’ registration policies, now and post Brexit. If we were Lord McNicol of West Kilbride (Lab): I rise to move to remain in the mutual recognition of professional Amendment 38, and thank the noble Baroness, Lady qualifications directives, it would not be necessary for Randerson, for her support. This grouping includes individuals to contact host countries’ regulatory bodies. many amendments along the same vein. Your Lordships There would also be no need for any new system, such will be pleased to know that I am not going to speak to as the recognition of professional qualifications each one individually, but I will address the common regulations. Could the Minister confirm whether there themes of this group of amendments, pulling out a will be any meaningful differences between the RPQR few specific details. I am sure that a number of noble and the MRPQ? Lords will be speaking in more detail to their amendments Amendment 40 is not dissimilar from Amendment 58 within this group. in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Randerson. This group seeks the inclusion of new clauses after It simply calls on Her Majesty’s Government to take Clause 5 which will put on the face of the Bill a host of all necessary steps to implement an international trade organisations, agreements and arrangements which agreement that allows us to provide for the continued are vital to the continuing smooth operation and rail service with Europe and cross-border between functioning of life, organisations and businesses post Northern Ireland and the Republic. In their Answer to Brexit. As I am sure the Minister is aware, many of a Written Question on 13 December 2018, the these amendments have come from organisations, trade Government stated they would seek bilateral agreement unions and businesses that are concerned about how regarding the operation of services through the Channel they will be affected post Brexit and are seeking ways Tunnel after the UK leaves the EU. Could the Minister to mitigate any harm. Many of these amendments do update us on those developments? not fully resolve the problem of Brexit, nor all the In further amendments, we explore the road haulage costs associated with leaving, but if the Government and passenger transport sector and ensuring the were to accept them it would offer a level of protection continuation of reciprocal agreements and access. Could and certainty that is currently not there. the Minister clarify what advice has been given to coach firms that operate across Europe on the outcome 9 pm of a no-deal Brexit? I turn to some of the specifics. It is rather nice to see Amendment 48 calls on the UK to remain in the Her Majesty’s Government listening to and acting on tripartite agreement on the movement of horses between our amendments, specifically Amendment 38. I ask the UK, France and the Republic of Ireland. If the the Minister: is it correct, as stated on GOV.UK, that UK leaves the EU in March 2019 with no deal in the UK will remain part of the common transit place, the UK would be treated as a third country, and convention? Retaining membership of the CTC will therefore any movement of equines to countries within reduce administrative burdens by removing the need the EU would be subject to EU third-country rules. for additional import/export declarations when transiting Her Majesty’s Government were seeking discussions across multiple customs territories. It also provides with the European Commission to allow the UK to cash-flow benefits by allowing the movement of goods become a listed third country on the day we leave, as across a custom territory without the payment of with Australia and New Zealand. Will the Minister duties until the final destination. update us on those discussions as well? Amendment 38, like so many other amendments in My noble friend Lord Grantchester has unfortunately this group, expresses the belief that retaining membership had to leave, but he was going to pick up the issue of, or recognising mutual benefits of existing agreements and seek clarification on, the pet travel scheme. 1137 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1138

Amendment 70 is probably the most comprehensive Under the current mutual recognition arrangements, with regard to the agencies, authorities and organisations for doctors, nurses, vets, dentists, midwives, pharmacists that we believe the UK should retain membership of. and architects the recognition is automatic, providing The list will be well known to the Government, since it that conditions on minimum training and professional comes from the CBI. The first group of nine are experience are met. For others, there is a general bodies of which the CBI says it is essential to retain system whereby regulators cannot ordinarily refuse membership for their members’benefit. The amendment applications to practise from other EEA or Swiss goes on to list a second group of five bodies, membership nationals in this country if they hold the qualifications of which, although not essential, would provide a required by their home state. Since 1997, the UK has smooth road toward regulatory compliance post Brexit. recognised over 142,000 EU qualifications. This is a This amendment makes it an objective for an appropriate big job. Noble Lords should remind themselves that authority to take all necessary steps to implement an there will be a lot of work to do around this, including international trade agreement with the EU that would for lawyers, social workers and engineers. Over enable the UK to continue to participate in these 27,000 decisions to recognise UK qualifications have various EU agencies and bodies. been taken in the EU. The November 2018 Political Declaration setting The political declaration states: out the Framework for the Future Relationship between “The Parties should also develop appropriate arrangements the European Union and the United Kingdom stated on those professional qualifications which are necessary to the that, although the parties would preserve regulatory pursuit of regulated professions, where in the Parties’ mutual autonomy, they would seek, interest”. “to promote regulatory approaches that … promote avoidance of I suggest that replicating the system to be at least unnecessary barriers to trade in goods and are compatible to the extent possible”. as good as the current one is in the interest of this party—the United Kingdom. On that basis, I hope Accepting and including these bodies would do just that, as the noble Lord, Lord McNicol, said, we are that. With the CBI, TUC and many other organisations pushing on an open door here. The four principles calling on the Government to act in such strong language, set out in this joint amendment are the same as the I hope that the Minister can oblige us, and I look Government’s four priorities for a future mutual forward to his response. I beg to move. recognition regime. I hope that the Minister can confirm Lord Fox (LD): My Lords, I am grateful to the that that is the Government’s understanding; perhaps noble Lord, Lord McNicol of West Kilbride, for they can settle some nerves by putting this amendment introducing this group. As he pointed out, there are in the Bill. 17 amendments that cover objectives for future free Clearly, a no-deal Brexit situation would make life trade agreements. The noble Lord, Lord Hannay, is much more difficult. A statutory instrument is running not in his place right now, and I would never disagree its way through the system; it has been published, but with him. He identified a different group of amendments it is subject to the affirmative process and has yet to be as being the most important part of what we are debated in the House. I look forward to that; I say that debating, but, for many people and for the impact that because there are so many SIs, but I look forward to this is going to have out there in the country, this that process, because this is an important part of what group of amendments is the plumbing. They cover the we need to do. day-to-day operations of life, so I consider this to be a The point made by the noble Lord, Lord McNicol, most important group of amendments. about UK workers working in the EU is equally I am not going to speak to all 17 amendments, but I important and vital. Clearly, if we leave the European am going to speak to four of them, which means that, Union with no agreement, we cannot mandate what unfortunately, I will break my own rule of brevity, but happens to all our professionals in the EU 27, EEA I will try to be efficient in what I say. I am going to and Swiss territories. However, I urge the Government speak to Amendments 39, 43 and 44, to which my to explain what representations they will be making in name is attached, as well as Amendment 69, to which the event of a no-deal Brexit to carry over the my noble friend Lady Jolly added her name. She is qualifications at the very least, and then, of course, to unable to attend. put in place a regime that works. Amendment 39 requires the UK to negotiate with the EU an international trade agreement that creates a Amendment 43 requires the UK to seek to negotiate system for the mutual recognition of professional an international trade agreement with the EU that qualifications, as the noble Lord, Lord McNicol, set binds the UK to EU rules on open and fair competition. out. It must be at least as exhaustive as our current We have had some discussion around state aid in the system and allow people to work across borders, allow debate on a previous amendment, so I will not repeat workers to demonstrate the necessary requirements that. However, this also includes mergers and anti-trust where qualifications diverge, and provide for co-operation behaviour. The political declaration states: between regulators. The noble Lord, Lord McNicol, “The future relationship must ensure open and fair competition. used the example of architects; looking at the other Provisions to ensure this should cover state aid, competition, side of the coin, 20% of the architects in this country social and employment standards, environmental standards, climate change, and relevant tax matters, building on the level playing come from an EEA or Swiss background. That is just field arrangements provided for in the Withdrawal Agreement”— one profession—one activity. The Government have the stated aim of building 300,000 houses; they will clearly, now we do not know what that agreement will not have enough architects if we are not successful be— with this activity. “and commensurate with the overall economic relationship”. 1139 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1140

[LORD FOX] time period within the UK. Formally, the Government We have had this discussion in a different context, but have set out that the UK would like to remain part of a binding undertaking that there will be no regression REACH. How will that be possible? on standards is important to a lot of people in this Finally, turning to Amendment 69, those of us who House, and other noble Lords who are not here today had the pleasure of taking part in debates on the have made this point with strong arguments. Nuclear Safeguards Bill will be aware of this particular On Amendment 44 and REACH, the noble Lord, issue, which is the European Observatory on the Supply Lord Hain, spoke about regulatory divergence; if there of Medical Radioisotopes. I will not go into huge is ever an opportunity for regulatory divergence, it will detail here, except to say that this is a vital organisation be around the complexity of something like chemicals of which the United Kingdom must remain a member. legislation. I will not go into huge detail about UK Again, what will be the mechanics of this? In England, REACH, but this House needs to understand the scale half a million medical scans are performed annually and the scope of this activity. I have experienced it using imported radioisotopes. More than 10,000 patients from a business side, and the commitment of European across the UK have their cancers directly treated by businesses in sitting on literally hundreds of sub- these materials each year. Radioisotopes are also used committees, debating and working through the nature to diagnose coronary heart disease and for biochemical of chemicals, how they should be used, and the associated analysis of blood, serum, urine, hormones and antigens. risks, laws and regulations is absolutely huge. I can see And of course they also have a scientific and a research looks of consternation. use as well. Our research community is worried about this, as is the medical community. We import 80% of our radioisotopes, in particular 9.15 pm from specialist labs in the Netherlands, Belgium and REACH, as I am sure Ministers know, establishes France. There is also a supplier in South Africa, but a common framework of rights and obligations not to the extent of our European suppliers. They are throughout the supply chain around chemicals ranging unstable. I shall not go into the chemistry—my degree from chemical manufacturers, importers, distributors, has long expired—but these things do not last for ever. formulators and end-users. It touches all of our lives, You do not buy them and keep them; they fall away. every day, practically all of the time. Chemicals are There are fewer than 10 supply reactors worldwide to produced and put in the supply chain by upstream provide 90% of the world’s supply. manufacturers, and there is a very detailed process by The observatory’s role is to look across, manage which they are regulated. and help the United Kingdom to manage its supply EU REACH became law in 2007, and the registration chain and ensure that we do not run short of those for existing chemicals was completed 11 years later. vital components to everyday help. Clearly, in the long Every day, there are changes to the REACH legislation, term, we could build our own reactors, but that is not and herein hangs the problem. The United Kingdom a short-term response. has stated in the withdrawal agreement, I believe, that The Government have stated their aim that we we wish to remain in regulatory step with the European should have UK participation in the European Union around REACH. But how do the Government, Observatory on the Supply of Medical Isotopes. in the event that the United Kingdom is no longer Amendment 69 states: part of the European Union, whether through agreement “It shall be the objective of an appropriate authority to take or through falling out without an agreement, envisage all necessary steps to implement an international trade agreement this process? Will we simply step back and take every which enables the United Kingdom, after exit day”— rule that is coming from the EU 27 as the REACH which could be a very short time away— legislation evolves? We will be unlikely to be invited in “to fully participate in the European Observatory on the Supply as equal partners to the REACH process by the European of Medical Radioisotopes.” Union. The European Chemicals Agency, which is How will that be achieved? coming up in Amendment 70—my noble friend Lord Foster will be speaking to that amendment—clearly has a role to play. The United Kingdom’s role within Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con): My Lords, I that agency will also be important. shall speak to Amendment 63 in my name and those There is an SI which will be inevitable in the event of the noble Lords, Lord Dykes and Lord Browne of of a no-deal Brexit. This SI is flawed, and I have asked Ladyton. I thank them for lending their support to the to see the Minister to discuss this particular issue amendment, which relates not just to Amendment 39 directly. I obviously will not talk about it today. but also, I would argue, Amendment 45—it is bizarre Suffice to say, this seems like a niche subject— that they are not in the same group. something that only wonks like me should care about—but The amendment relates to lawyers in particular and I have to tell your Lordships that UK companies with the right to provide services, establish yourself in the a REACH registration will no longer be able to sell legal profession and practise. I am a currently non- into the EEA unless the Government have sorted practising Scottish advocate but, as a young, recently this out. Downstream users currently importing from qualified advocate,I went to Brussels to practise European the EEA will face new registrations in the UK—whether law without having to take a separate qualification. I immediately or over a period of months and days am greatly indebted, as I think are your Lordships, to is still not clear. The UK Health and Safety Executive the noble and learned Lord, Lord Keen of Elie, for will grandfather existing REACH registrations, but it moving the relevant statutory instrument, the Services will then require re-registration or something within a of Lawyers and Lawyer’s Practice (Revocation etc.) 1141 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1142

(EU Exit) Regulations 2019, which the House adopted. amendments—I have not counted how many of them I shall quote him because I cannot put it better than there are. That would be a very neat way forward. I am him. He said: sure it would get the agreement of the French and the “In the event of us exiting without any deal, there will be no Irish, and it would be very much in the interests of the reciprocal rights—which was one reason why, as I indicated, these business. I remember, when Ireland reduced the rate of regulations are required. They are necessary in order that we can VAT, the number of trainers and owners that left this establish a position in which all third-party country lawyers will country.Personally, it has been to my advantage because be on the same standing in the absence of a free trade agreement or other agreement with a third-party country. There will be no the cottage I live in when I am in North Yorkshire was reciprocity—that will be a matter for the relevant EU country to vacated by a trainer, Sue Bramall, who I understand consider—but clearly it is a matter that we would wish to address has had great success training in Ireland, but obviously in future negotiations consequent on our exit from the European it is to the UK’s detriment. I would hate to see that Union. This is dealing with the position in the United Kingdom happen again here. in light of the existing regulatory regime under EU law. Clearly, I was aghast when I heard the Minister say earlier and quite patently, you could not address the question of how the EU 27 are going to treat our lawyers going forward”.—[Official that the Government sought to revisit Clause 6 on the Report, 15/1/19; col 177.] European Medicines Agency. One of my outside What concerns me greatly is that the next generation appointments is to work with the Dispensing Doctors’ of young, budding advocates will qualify on 30 March Association,whoseheadquartersisbasedinKirkbymoorside or 30 April and will be unable immediately to ply their in North Yorkshire. We are in this curious position trade, or to continue to ply their trade after 29 March, where we are going to follow the falsified medicines if we crash out of the European Union without a deal. directive unless we crash out with no deal. That is the I could not find it in Hansard, but I took a note of only benefit I can see of crashing out with no deal. The what your Lordships said. I would not like to attribute GPs in Ireland have been deemed to be self-employed, it to my noble and learned friend Lord Keen, but we so they are going to be exempt from the provisions of learned when the regulations were passed that Ireland’s the falsified medicines directive. Why is there this professional body has taken the opportunity to increase dichotomy—that we do not wish to be part of the the cost of qualifying as an Irish lawyer to practise European Medicines Agency, but we do wish to be there from £300 to £3,000. That is quite an increase. I part of the falsified medicines directive? I would like a think we learned from the Liberal Democrat Benches route to understanding. I would be very happy to that, in another EU member state, a rule was passed to accept a letter on why that should be. prevent the sharing of an office or creating a partnership I am not going to rehearse and itemise all the with a British or other third-country lawyer wishing to agencies in Amendment 70, but I would make a particular practise in that country. plea for the EASA, the European Food Standards We will have a two-tier system. Having passed the Agency and European Environment Agency. As I regulations, we have, quite rightly, granted those EU have mentioned previously—I have not yet had satisfaction lawyers who currently practise here or are qualified on this point—we should commit to remaining part of and wish to continue to practise here rights to continue the European rapid alert system, on incidents of food or enable them to do so. How can that possibly be? I hygiene and food poisoning. The need for this was ask that the Minister use her good offices to ensure never more apparent than during the 2010 Horsegate that that position is not sustained beyond 29 March. scenario. We were lucky that that was a case of food I entirely endorse what the noble Lord, Lord McNicol, fraud, where horsemeat was passed off as beef. Whatever from the Labour Benches said in moving Amendment happens to Clause 6, I hope that the Minister will 38, and I look forward to Amendment 45 on much the confirm this evening that we will remain part of the same lines. I hosted a meeting here of all the professions European rapid alert system for such incidents. that are deeply concerned: architects, dentists, lawyers, nurses and so on. I remind your Lordships that the 9.30 pm mutual recognition directive took 21 years to agree in LordLansley(Con):MyLords,IrefertoAmendment62 the case of architects. That is not a position to which in my name, which is part of a series of amendments in we would wish to return. this group concerning mutual recognition— mutual I had a meeting with the Irish Commissioner, Phil recognition of good manufacturing practice, in this Hogan, who was kind enough to receive a group of us instance. I was prompted to table the amendment not from the House of Commons when I was on the Select least because many people in the pharmaceutical industry Committee there. I am currently a member of the see this issue as an important part of our future economic all-party parliamentary racing group, and in that capacity partnership arrangements with the European Union, and others I attend race meetings. I also had the whether we continue to be EU members or in the single privilege to represent Thirsk Racecourse, and trainers market or not. throughout Thirsk and Malton and the Vale of York, Like Amendment 42 on the mutual recognition of during that period. I am grateful that Amendment 48 authorised economic operators, Amendment 62 relates is being discussed this evening. If the tripartite agreement to instances of where the European Union has substantial existed in its own right before it became part of the mutual recognition agreements with third-party countries. arrangements of the European Union, would it not In the case of authorised economic operators, those make sense if it reverted immediately to that—a backstop, countries include Switzerland, Japan, the United States if you like? Is that the Government’s intention? I see and similar countries—although not China in the no benefit in taking the tripartite agreement forward instance of good manufacturing practice. It would as part as existing arrangements. It will get lost in the be deeply perverse for us to start with standards that wash, as it has done this evening in this group of align entirely with those of the European Union, 1143 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1144

[LORD LANSLEY] The situation we have, which is a tripartite deal, whether on authorised economic operators or good developed before the European Union became involved. manufacturing practice, looking at the two amendments. There is some level of involvement on the part of the If we lost that relationship with the European Union, European Union and negotiations have been going on it would make obvious good sense to maintain that in Brussels between the British Horseracing Authority mutual recognition. and the Commission. It is important to highlight this In that context, the amendments commend themselves because the system has been in existence for many to my noble friends on the Front Bench because they years and has been absolutely seamless. The relationship are about continuity and trying to maintain the existing between the United Kingdom, France and Ireland has structure of agreements. Of course we want mutual flourished. We can think of Irish horses winning in recognition of good manufacturing practice with not large numbers at Cheltenham, French successes at only the European Union but the United States, Japan Ascot and Newmarket, and our own recent victories and Switzerland because, if we leave the European in the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe. Union, four of the five largest pharmaceutical companies The real key is this. The system of horse passports will be outside the European Union, with two in and documentation is managed in the United Kingdom Switzerland and two in the United Kingdom. This by our highly respected industry bodies: Weatherbys, issue matters a great deal to this important industry. the Thoroughbred Breeders’ Association and the British Unfortunately, given the uncertainty and the way in Horseracing Authority, with the approval of Defra which the European Commission sent advice to companies and the Animal and Plant Health Agency. It works on their responsibility to prepare as if there would be extremely well and is therefore something that should no deal, pharmaceutical companies have, of course, be cherished. It is particularly important to the economy already invested a considerable amount in ensuring of the Republic of Ireland. People in the equine industry that their batch authorisations and conformity in Ireland are extremely anxious about this situation assessments—and the authorisations associated with being damaged in any way. those—can be conducted inside the EU 27. That has As a result of the support over the years of our cost quite a lot of pharmaceutical companies quite a Governments for the equine industry, stretching right lot of money already. across party divides, it has turned into a great success The noble Lord, Lord Fox, was quite right: this story and is the best-managed and best-organised group of amendments is about the plumbing, the racing industry in the world. It contributes to the innards, of this issue. I am afraid that day by day, pleasure of millions of people who watch horseracing evidence of the enormity of the cost—in time, energy either at racecourses or on television. All our and money—of trying to stay as close as we can to the facilities have been upgraded and the industry should position we would have been in if we had stayed in the be supported. European Union is mounting. It does not do to dwell I will refer to the comments made by my noble on that but there we are. friend Lady McIntosh. If it were somehow possible to Finally, I am really surprised that some of our retrieve this from where it seems to have landed up and Brexit-supporting colleagues are not here to laud see it go back to its original tripartite status, which Amendment 38—the lead amendment in the group— was actually free of the European Union, that would on the common transit convention, which will assist be excellent. However, the reality is that for whatever significantly with customs simplification and the reason there has been a process of greater and greater achievement of some reduction in the friction that involvement by the European Union; in which case, I might otherwise occur in trade. It is achieved with will ask my noble friend two simple questions. What third-party countries and is not something that the will happen during the transition period in this area of EU absolutely has to offer. However—although I stand activity which is so important to us? What is our to be corrected by my noble friends—as the noble negotiating objective for the longer term as far as the Lord, Lord McNicol, has said, it appears to have been work of the British Horseracing Authority with our agreed not only that we would remain within the own Government is concerned? common transit convention after exit day but that we I conclude by expressing my admiration for many would continue to remain in it even if we were to leave colleagues both in your Lordships’ House and in without a deal. That is a positive development. another place who have done so much work over the Associated with it is the new computerised transit years to keep this industry up to the highest possible system which will help us to try to make progress on standards of governance and popularity. Finally, I will some of the customs simplifications that, whatever praise one particular individual. When the Single happens, will be important to the reduction of business European Act came in and there was a change in the costs. I commend to my noble friends Amendment 62, way that VAT was dealt with, we nearly lost the racing which should certainly be an objective of the Government industry altogether. We had a huge fight, but it was in their current discussions about the future relationship saved by the former Chancellor of the Exchequer, my with the European Union. noble friend Lord Lamont. For anyone who is interested in and has a passion for racing, he of all people is Lord Risby (Con): My Lords, I will speak to someone to whom we owe a great deal. Amendment 48. I am a director of the Horserace Betting Levy Board as a government appointee, and a Baroness Randerson (LD): My Lords, I start by former Member of Parliament for Newmarket, which, craving the indulgence of the Committee and offering after all, is historically the world headquarters of an apology for the fact that I missed the start of the racing. Equine matters are very dear to my heart. speech of the noble Lord, Lord McNichol. I was 1145 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1146 racing back from Cardiff, but noble Lords will know 9.45 pm that that involves the Great Western Railway. The The airlines have been remarkably silent. Of course, train was only a few minutes late but that was the time we are aware that they have signed non-disclosure I needed in order to hear the beginning of the noble agreements with the Government. I am fully aware Lord’s speech. that if you look closely at the terms and conditions for I have three amendments in this group, all designed tickets sold for travel after 29 March you will find the to ensure that we try to keep the transport system required wording to ensure that passengers have been running as normally and smoothly as possible after warned in legal terms about the situation. However, Brexit. I will start with Amendment 41, which relates there has not been the publicity that one would like. to road haulage. We have heard the story many times The EU has declared that although planes could about the dangers to our road haulage system. Indeed, and would continue to fly after a no-deal Brexit, it last week the leaked Border Force document estimated would be a limited permission for a limited period. that there could be a decline of up to 87% for three to That permission would extend only to the historic six months after a no-deal Brexit if some arrangements level of flights; in other words, no additional routes or were not put in place. We have had the preparation for services would be allowed. According to IATA, if we the ECMT certificates that would have to come into leave with no deal 5 million tickets would be cancelled place if we had no deal: roughly 1,200 certificates for a this year. None of this is good for our aviation industry haulage industry that involves 30,000-plus hauliers. or our holiday plans—and certainly not good for our Clearly, this is totally inadequate. We have had the business community when a large percentage of business fiasco of the ferry-less ferry services to try to smooth flights are included in those 5 million tickets. My the process. amendment seeks to ensure that aviation will continue in the current manner. We have talked many times in this House about Dover, but I want to say a word about Holyhead, the On Amendment 58, I felt unable to add my name second-largest roll-on roll-off ferry port in Britain. to Amendment 40 in the name of the noble Lord, Some 500 lorries per night go through Holyhead—that Lord McNicol, because it was too narrow. It is okay as is three miles of queues, and the route to the port is far as it goes but we need more. It refers to bilateral through the town. In other words, any kind of queuing arrangements but we need reciprocal access across rail system caused by a no-deal Brexit would make it services, not necessarily only on a bilateral basis. The impossible for the town to function. I have had meetings Government said that they want in the future to make with representatives of the Road Haulage Association, bilateral arrangements with Ireland, the Netherlands, who have alarmed me with some information about Belgium and France—our immediate neighbours. the way in which the modern haulage industry works. However, rail services currently stretch further than They pointed out to me that an Amazon lorry can that. I realise that the issue of passenger services have 8,000 individual shipments on it, which—if we relates mainly to Eurostar and the Channel Tunnel, do not have arrangements in place—could lead to an but Eurostar is planning to extend its services beyond individual customs declaration in each of those 8,000 cases. those neighbouring countries and into Germany, for Each customs declaration has 36 different fields that example. Freight transport has the North Sea to have to be completed. They estimated that it would Mediterranean core network. That freight corridor take 170 staff one day’s worth of work to deal with goes well beyond our immediate neighbours. one lorry. We all know that Amazon will adapt, but it In addition, we have to bear in mind that regulatory cannot adapt in two months. divergence is bad for manufacturers of trains, the equipment that goes into them and the rails on which There are numerous other cases and examples of they travel. We have a very big industry in that respect the disruption that no deal would bring, so in this and it is extremely worried that our standards are not amendment I seek to ensure, in relation to road haulage, going to remain in tight alignment. that we do not have no deal and keep the arrangements I believe that these three amendments should be as close as possible to what we have now. We should considered seriously as a way of, at a minimum, continuing bear in mind—I was told this by a representative of as far as possible with business as usual, avoiding the the freight industry—that it is in what it describes as a perils that we might fall into if we have a free-for-all in huge hole. They said, “The moment we do not apply the future. the rules, we lose control of the border”. So it is no good for our Government to say that we will not do the checks and will take it on trust. The point the Viscount Trenchard (Con): My Lords, the hour is freight industry is making is that the moment we start late and a large number of amendments are being taking things on trust, without the checks, we will have debated. I shall not touch on more than one or two. I serious problems. was impressed by the mention by my noble friends Lady McIntosh and Lord Risby of Amendment 48, In Amendment 57 we move on to aviation. Many on the tripartite agreement. I declare an interest because noble Lords will recall that last week the airlines came my brother-in-law is a racehorse trainer near Newbury in for criticism because they had been selling tickets and he is worried that he will not be able to move his without drawing attention to the fact that, if there is staff and horses round Ireland and France as is necessary no deal and we leave on 29 March without any for his business. I see no reason why this agreement arrangements, they felt that those tickets might not should not be grandfathered through because it existed necessarily be honoured. That was the criticism and before the European Union was founded. I fear, as my yet the Government have claimed that the aviation noble friend Lord Risby also intimated, that the tentacles situation is arranged and organised. of the European state have already embraced Ireland 1147 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1148

[VISCOUNT TRENCHARD] significance of this industry. It accounts for something and France to such an extent that they will not have like 80% of GDP; it pays £76 billion a year in taxes, the freedom unilaterally to decide to continue the which support our National Health Service; and it has agreement. I hope, though, that our United Kingdom created 2 million jobs spread over the country. It is will have such freedom after Brexit but perhaps we can absolutely critical but has been very largely ignored. I find a way to preserve this tripartite agreement for make a plea to the Government that they should begin the future. to get serious about financial services and understand It is clear that all of us would like as little disruption their significance. to current arrangements as possible, but most of these If I were to describe the industry in the UK, it amendments should not be in this Bill. They have basically breaks into thirds. Financial services range nothing whatever to do with its purpose. I simply wish all the way from the smallest fintech companies, through to comment on Amendment 55, tabled by the noble insurance, asset management and banks, right up to Baroness, Lady Kramer, who has not, I believe, spoken the global sector of the London Stock Exchange and to it. Does she not realise that the City of London has the London Clearing House. It is huge and varied, but suffered from the imposition of several barriers to roughly a third is domestic-facing and relatively untouched trade in financial services as a result of having been by Brexit. forced to implement some new European regulations About a third is intensely based on the industry’s in recent years, such as parts of MiFID II, AIFMD EU 27 clientele. About half of that business has and others? One of the benefits of Brexit is that the already gone or is in the process of leaving, and if City will be free to adopt proportionate and sensible anyone speaks to government on a day when they are regulation that will enhance its business in years to come. being honest, basically they do not think that we have Brexit also provides an opportunity for the UK to much chance of keeping much of that one-third in the playan enhanced role in the development of proportionate UK over the medium term and certainly not over the regulation at the global level, balancing the need to long term. protect the consumer and the environment against the We come to the final third, which is absolutely requirementtoprovideaninnovation-friendlyenvironment critical and where the decisions made in the coming that will enable us to abandon some of the more weeks and months will have a great impact. I refer to cumbersome and restrictive parts of the European the global piece, which one could think of in a way as regulatory regime to which we have become progressively being bigger than but represented by the London shackled and which is, in places, more about Stock Exchange and the London Clearing House. The harmonisation and protectionism than about the genuine future of that final global third has a real question protection of consumers. mark hanging over it. I shall give one example. I have known the chief I say to the noble Viscount, Lord Trenchard, that executive of a Japanese pharmaceutical company for London is a global centre partly due to its long-standing more than 30 years. He told me that when Brexit came experience and partly due to good regulation, but along he was not happy, but he has spent more than critical to it is that it is the global financial centre for $8 million upgrading his European network and is the euro—the second most significant global currency. now confident that he will be able to research, manufacture That is what underpins London and its global role. and distribute medicines in both the UK and EU27 Unfortunately, in all finance, where we know that risk after Brexit, just as he does now, on whatever basis we exists, the ultimate protection and backstop in a time leave. He told me that now that he has spent the of risk is liquidity, and for all euro-denominated money, he would like to see the upside of Brexit. He transactions that source of final liquidity is the European says that the upside is that he expects us to return to Central Bank. Therefore, from a European perspective, what I believe is a more natural state for this country, to be exposed to that level of risk, which is in euro in which we will have a less cumbersome regulatory trillions, with no ability to control the regulation, regime that will be more helpful for a life sciences monitoring or supervision of a major global financial company such as his to innovate in new therapies, new centre is really serious and significant. drugs and new medicines. What worries me is that, I believe that fundamentally the Government have although we are about to leave the European Union, never looked at this issue from a European perspective we will, through this type of amendment, promise to and that they completely underestimate the medium continue to align entirely with EU regulation, which in and long-term interest in the European Union in places relies too much on the precautionary principle, pulling back much of that activity to an area where it and in that case there will be absolutely no upside to can regulate, monitor and supervise because it carries leaving. Therefore, we must have a balance here. the ultimate risk. Suggestions that have come from the City, which have been kicked around in government Baroness Kramer (LD): My Lords, perhaps it is and in this House, have come largely from a very small sensible to come in right after the noble Viscount, Brexiteer think tank. I know the people well and have Lord Trenchard, following that invitation. I will try to been to many of their meetings. be brief. Amendment 55 stands in my name. In the past two Viscount Trenchard: I totally agree that the bulk of and a half years I have been shocked by how little the settlement of euro-denominated transactions takes attention has been paid to financial services and to place in London but, in a similar way, London is the what would happen to our access to the EU 27 in the most important centre for the settlement of offshore field of financial services after any Brexit. I do not dollar-denominated securities—or even renminbi, or suppose that I have to rehearse for this Committee the yen. That is because London is the leading global 1149 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1150 financial market in the world. I have not seen any and to recognise that they will have to get totally moves by the United States Fed or Japan’s FSA to try engaged and make some real compromises—I suspect to repatriate London’s role in their currency securities. around their own red lines. If they do not, they will be making absolutely sure that, over five to 10 years, 10 pm significant parts of the industry will be sucked back into very capable hands in Frankfurt, Paris and Baroness Kramer: I assure the noble Viscount that Amsterdam. from the perspective of the dollar, far more of the This is not an instant crisis, although there may be transactions clear through New York. It is a bigger some areas of instant crisis. But it is an area where the market. I know we often say that we are the largest, Government need to move now, and not lock themselves but if we look at the table comparisons, New York is into a position from which they will see this industry, frankly bigger. Certainly, dollar dominance is exercised not perhaps disappear altogether, but lose its global through New York. The yen is less of a controversial leadership, when they could, with more intelligence player, and there are not a lot of renminbi. If anybody and flexibility, have provided some degree of protection. thinks that China is going to allow its currency to develop a real global presence and not be regulated, Baroness Hooper (Con): My Lords,I apologise for being monitored and supervised by the Chinese state, they tail-end Charlie in this discussion—at least, I hope I have missed any understanding of how China works. am. I agree that this is a very important group of We are convenient but temporary, and we need to amendments. I shall concentrate particularly on recognise that. Amendment 39 because that is the overarching People talk about the growing market, but essentially amendment giving mutual recognition of qualifications, the global markets function in the dollar, the euro which has been so important for frictionless commercial and—in the future—the renminbi. They will not function activities and relationships throughout our membership in small African or South American currencies. Those of the European Union. I trust and hope that the are not players; they are minor currencies. Sterling is mutual recognition and—dare I say it?—harmonisation treated by the industry as a minor currency. There are to some extent of professional qualifications will be two, and there will be three, major currencies that able to continue, to give the continuity to which my essentially underpin global activity. At the moment noble friend Lord Lansley referred, but also, for example, one is dominated by New York and the other by in the field of education, where university qualifications London—and the one dominated by London is the euro. and degrees have been based on mutual recognition of What worries me is that the think tanks that have qualifications and the ability to work in professional been going through this process have an underlying fields in more than one country. conceit and arrogance, and imagine that somehow we My own interest in this is that as a solicitor I went are fundamentally and in the long-term superior, that to work in Paris in 1973, a year after we joined the no one else will have the capabilities that we have, and European Community. Although I did not need a that in the end, Europe needs us more than we need carte de travail—a work permit—at that stage, I still Europe. But Europe works on a five to 10-year strategy needed a carte de séjour, but that was progress. There to gradually bring back choice pieces of that industry— have always been particular difficulties for the legal and we can see it. profession simply because of the difference between I have a real question for the Minister in all this. the common-law system and the civil law system. That The right-wing think tank came up with a solution has led to a different approach to our understanding called “mutual recognition”, which basically required of what we have been trying to do within the European the European Union to change how it made regulation Community throughout our membership. and to change its legal framework completely. The I may not be up to speed on all the detail. There think tank thought that was entirely reasonable. It was may have been discussions, and possibly solutions, irrational, and has been abandoned. The Government about continuing the recognition of professional have finally recognised that it was complete nonsense. qualifications, but I am not aware of them. I am There is now an idea that third-country equivalence surprised that the Law Society, for example, has not could be the mechanism that will apply. However, we provided any briefing in this respect—at least not to all know that third-country equivalence can be cancelled me. Still, I would like to hear what the Minister has to for no reason at 29 days’ notice. That is a very unstable say about this. At the next stage of the Bill I would way to provide access for a key industry. hope that we could be given more certainty about Various attempts have been made, but little thought, what may happen in future. I am curtailing my remarks effort, discussion or energy has gone into trying to because it is a late hour, but I feel that this would be so find solutions. I am exceedingly worried about that. important, not only to British and Scottish lawyers—I Looking at that global sector that I talked about, as I look to my noble friend Lady McIntosh in this respect— understand it, the European Union has provided an but to all the European Union lawyers who have set up equivalence ruling for the London Clearing House for offices and are operating in London and other parts of 12 months only. I am sure that it will extend the ruling the country, making our commercial activities ever beyond that—but it is a message. I understand that, as more possible. of this moment, no equivalence has been put in place Perhaps,as a sort of PS, I might refer to Amendment 48 for the London Stock Exchange. Again, that may and the tripartite agreement. I am not sure how this come, and it may come very much at the last minute. applies to polo ponies. As your Lordships will know, I But there is a deep message in all this. I make a real take a great interest in Latin America and Argentina. plea to the Government to take our amendment seriously Polo ponies are not only from South America and the 1151 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1152

[BARONESS HOOPER] would now be necessary for a formal agreement to be UK; they have passage rights within the EU. I do not made between the UK and the European Union. I am think the tripartite agreement itself applies to polo not entirely convinced that that will be easy under the ponies but I hope that any consideration of this element current arrangements without very active steps being of the debate could include that important aspect. taken by the Government. In Grand Committee last week, the Minister, the Lord Foster of Bath (LD): My Lords, the noble noble Lord, Lord Ashton of Hyde, said he was confident Baroness, Lady Hooper, hoped that she was tail-end that Ofcom would be able to be part of BEREC. He Charlie, and I apologise for depriving her of the said that during the transition period, appellation. In introducing this group of amendments, “the UK will no longer be a member state of the EU but, as is set the noble Lord, Lord McNicol, described them as out in the terms of the withdrawal agreement, common rules will remain in place. That is why we expect Ofcom to continue to being about the smooth organisation of business post participate in BEREC”.—[Official Report, 23/1/19; col. GC 96.] Brexit, while my noble friend Lord Fox described them as the necessary day-to-day plumbing of post-Brexit That is what they are expecting, yet it is in stark life. As we have heard, the amendments cover a wide contrast to what the withdrawal agreement actually range of issues, including mutual recognition, not says. In Article 128, it says—I will paraphrase—that least of qualifications, but also seeking a way to have with only one caveat, we cannot participate in decision- the maximum continued relationship with many EU making or even attend meetings of expert groups or bodies, expert groups, agencies and so on. In that similar entities.The caveat says—again, I paraphrase—that regard, Amendment 70 is perhaps the most comprehensive. UK representatives or experts may, upon invitation, I share the view of the noble Lord, Lord Lansley, that exceptionally attend meetings or parts of meetings of it is of mutual benefit to ourselves and the European bodies such as BEREC or ERGA, provided that either Union if we can find ways of staying as close as the discussion concerns the UK or UK residents or, possible to many of those bodies. If we fail to do so, “the presence of the United Kingdom is necessary and in the there will be some serious difficulties. I believe we need interest of the Union”. to take positive steps, as is suggested in Amendment 70, The noble Lord, Lord Ashton of Hyde, saw this as for instance, to achieve that close working relationship. a green light, and declared that there was “every If we do not do that, I believe there will be very reason” the EU would want Ofcom on these bodies significant problems. because, To illustrate that very briefly, I will touch on two “Ofcom is one of the leading telecoms regulators in Europe—if of the bodies that are referred to in Amendment 70: not the leading one. The interchange between Ofcom and other European regulators has been extremely beneficial … There is the Body of European Regulators for Electronic every reason to think that they would wish to continue that”.—[Official Communications—BEREC—and the European Report, 23/1/19; col. GC 97.] Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services, or That is not an interpretation of Article 128 which ERGA. It is worth remembering that the telecoms any rational person can give. It actually says that we industry in this country has revenues of something can be involved only in a small way, in exceptional like £40 billion a year and our broadcasting industry is circumstances and when it is necessary, so I do not read probably one of the best in the world; both are critical Article 128 as meaning that we will easily be able to to the UK’s economy and their success depends to a participate in that particular organisation. The same large extent on close co-operation with the EU 27 case could be made for all the other organisations countries. That is because, in the case of the telecoms which the Government may wish for us to continue to industry, for instance, many of the bodies regulated by have close relationships with. My question for the our own regulator, Ofcom, are members of subsidiaries Minister is simple: does he agree with my interpretation, which operate in many of those other countries—Virgin or with his noble friend during the debate in Grand Media, Vodafone, Three and Telefónica are very good Committee? If he agrees with my interpretation of examples. In broadcasting, we have our own domestic Article 128, are the Government willing to take the positive channels, but Ofcom also acts as host to something steps referred to—for example, in Amendment 70—to like 500 channels which are not shown in the UK, but achieve that close working relationship which is so are regulated here and shown in other countries.Therefore, important? it is very important that our regulator continues to work in a way that allows close alignment with the regulations that will apply across Europe. That means 10.15 pm having close involvement with those two bodies, BEREC I have one other question for the Minister: does he and ERGA. also accept that we have an additional problem not As such, my questions for the Minister are about referred to so far in these discussions, in relation to how that will be achieved. I suspect he will reject most data adequacy? It will be necessary, as I understand it, of the amendments in this group but that he will say it for there to be a data adequacy agreement between the is important to have close relationships, as the noble United Kingdom and the European Union before we Lord, Lord Lansley, said. It is worth reflecting that in will be able to participate in any way in the various the other place, the Minister for Digital and the Creative bodies referred to in these amendments. Margot James Industries, Margot James, said that Ofcom intended said in the other place that in the event of an agreement, to “seek observer status” within BEREC. As I pointed it would take two years. If it was a no-deal Brexit, it out on another occasion, that is no longer possible would take considerably longer. If that is the case, is it following changes to BEREC’s regulations in December the Minister’s belief that we may have a huge gap last year. For us to have observer status in BEREC, it between exit day and when we can even begin to have 1153 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1154 that close working relationship with the variety of That is a flavour of the catch-all that we have here, groups referred to in these amendments, and which with 17 amendments. I am looking at the representatives the noble Lord, Lord Lansley, and I believe is so of the usual channels: I am not sure how the grouping important? of these amendments happened, but they cover a very wide range of agreements. We have heard 12 excellent Lord Stevenson of Balmacara (Lab): My Lords, I speakers. They have ranged extensively and generated have to say a few words because my noble friend Lord some 24 questions, to which it falls to me to respond. I Grantchester, who would have spoken to a couple of am conscious of the time. I will bring my best endeavours amendments which have not been touched on, to this, but I have the feeling that rather a lengthy letter unfortunately is unable to be with us this evening as he will be winding its way to noble Lords. has a family illness which he had to attend to. I am sure your Lordships will want to send best wishes to Lord McAvoy (Lab): I expect a full reply. him. The two amendments which have not been referred Lord Bates: Yes, of course.I will probably miraculously to are Amendments 47 and 49. One is on time-sensitive sit down sometime around 10.39 pm. I think that is the goods and the worries here concern the arrangements, convention. Let me go through as much as I can. I particularly around the Channel Tunnel, for goods apologise to Members of the Committee and to the that are required for immediate delivery. The question reporters of our proceedings for the pace at which I underlying the amendment, which the noble Baroness, am going. Lady Neville-Rolfe, also put her name to, was whether the Government had any further information about The noble Lord, Lord McNicol, and my noble developments, since if the current arrangement is not friend Lord Lansley referred to the common transit going to work, other arrangements will need to be area. As my noble friend hinted, this is an area where brought into place, as time-sensitive goods are what we have some good news, because the UK has agreed they say on the tin. the common transit convention with the secretariat. Letters were received on 19 December 2018. That is Other noble Lords have spoken about medical isotopes. taking shape. On behalf of my noble friend Lord Grantchester, I wanted to mention the time-sensitivity of these, not The noble Baroness, Lady Kramer, talked about only in the general sense but particularly with air financial services. The Government are seeking a close travel, which is often used to transport them. We have future relationship on financial services with the EU experience of problems which have occurred, particularly that reflects our uniquely integrated markets and respects in Northern Ireland, because the route for radioisotopes UK and EU autonomy.The political declaration includes required in Northern Ireland is through Coventry commitments to close and structured co-operation on Airport, and even under existing arrangements, we regulatory and supervisory matters, grounded in the have had delays which caused problems for patients, future economic partnership. There will be a certain including the cancellation of treatments. Again, any Groundhog Day feeling to the answers to a lot of comments from the Minister would be helpful. these questions, because I will simply say that they are a matter for the future economic relationship, which On Amendment 49, the pet travel scheme has raised we hope will be deep and extensive across all these interest among those who travel to Europe with pets, headings. Of course, that is for another piece, or other particularly dogs and ferrets, which are the two main pieces, of legislation. groups carried. The existing scheme is thought not to be very effective, and there is a chance to revisit it The noble Baroness, Lady Randerson, spoke to her when it collapses after Brexit. Are Ministers aware amendments. On haulage, the Government have been that the BVA has set out 16 recommendations on clear that we want to maintain the existing levels of changes to pet travel rules after Brexit? Many of these access for UK and EU hauliers. A mutually beneficial are sensible and needed, and this would be an opportunity road freight agreement with the EU will support the to give the Committee an update on where they are on objective of frictionless trade. I very much take the this matter. point that the noble Baroness made about us often talking about Dover in the context of roll-on, roll-off, Lord Bates: My Lords, I thank noble Lords who but there is strategic importance, particularly on the have taken part in this debate. The noble Lord, island of Ireland, for Holyhead and movements through Lord Stevenson, referred to the pet travel scheme. The there. However, we understand that we need the noble Lord, Lord McNicol, started the debate by reassurance that we will have in place the arrangements talking about transport. The noble Lord, Lord Fox, needed to maintain continued access. On that basis, referred to arrangements for UK-EU chemicals through we welcome the contingency proposals being made by REACH in particular. My noble friends Lady McIntosh the European Commission on the basis that the and Lady Hooper talked about legal services. My Government are seeking a very close partnership based on noble friend Lord Risby talked about horseracing reciprocal and binding agreements that protect the and the tripartite agreement. The noble Baroness, rights of road hauliers to access EU markets and vice Lady Randerson, talked about transport. My noble versa. friend Lord Lansley talked about authorised economic The noble Lord, Lord McNicol, also talked about operators. My noble friend Lord Trenchard talked rail services, which are mentioned in Amendment 40. about horseracing and financial services. The noble The Government are carefully considering the potential Baroness, Lady Kramer, focused very much on financial implications of leaving the EU, including implications services. The noble Lord, Lord Foster, talked about for the continuation of cross-border rail. The noble telecoms and broadcasting. Lord, Lord Fox, also referred to this through the 1155 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1156

[LORD BATES] are committed to it, and it is in the Bill. We have made Channel Tunnel and on the island of Ireland. I assure our positions clear on that, in terms of how we would noble Lords that we understand the importance of view it if similar amendments were proposed for other maintaining the continuity of these important cross-border agencies. rail services, and we will continue to negotiate with Amendment 39, on mutual recognition of professional our European partners to secure the best possible qualifications, was spoken to by my noble friends outcome. Lady Hooper and Lady McIntosh and by the noble In addressing Amendment 43, the noble Lord, Lords, Lord McNicol and Lord Fox. The Government Lord Fox, talked about open and fair competition. have clearly set out their objectives for mutual recognition The Government recognise that commitments to open of professional qualifications in the future relationship and fair competition are fundamental to all trading with the EU. We recognise the importance of mutual relationships; continuing the control of anti-competitive recognition for many sectors of our economy and the subsidies and creating a UK-wide subsidy control public sector. It offers all individuals working in regulated framework are crucially important. To support the professions a means of having their qualifications desire for a future relationship, we propose rule alignment recognised so that they can continue to provide valuable on state aid to be enforced by the Competition and services. However, Her Majesty’s Government must be Markets Authority,which already has a strong reputation in a position to negotiate the best possible outcome. I in the UK. We also have strong proposals in other note the risk that this amendment could undermine areas, including non-regression provisions for the that objective and compel Her Majesty’s Government environment, social issues and employment to ensure to reject highly beneficial agreements on mutual that we maintain the highest of standards, as my noble recognition simply because an agreement delivered its friend Lord Lansley requested. possible outcome in a way that differed from the Turning to Amendment 62, my noble friend detailed requirement set out in this amendment. Lord Lansley and the noble Lord, Lord Stevenson, said that it raised important issues for the future 10.30 pm relationship with the EU, by providing that the patients The noble Lord, Lord Fox, asked what representations should not be disadvantaged. Wehave given commitments the UK will be making in the case of no deal to that patients should not be disadvantaged; industry provide recognition of qualifications, which was the should be able to get its products into the UK market purpose of Amendment 39. The mutual recognition of as quickly as possible, and we continue to play a professional qualifications directives will no longer leading role in promoting public health. The Government apply in the event of leaving without a deal, which is have already set out their aim to secure participation of course why we want a deal. The UK will ensure that in the European Medicines Agency. The political professionals arriving in the UK with EEA or Swiss declaration sets out the mutual commitment of the qualifications after exit day will have means to seek UK and the EU to explore working together in future recognition of their qualifications. The Government medicines regulation and negotiating the UK’s ongoing have prepared legislation to update the recognition of co-operation. professional qualifications regulations. This will bring Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD): Will the Minister clarify a new system into force for exit day. The UK has what he said about seeking to participate in the European reached agreements with Ireland, Liechtenstein, Norway Medicines Agency? The noble Baroness, Lady Fairhead, and Switzerland to address specific arrangements for in an earlier grouping, said it was the intention to the recognition of professional qualifications. remove Clause 6 from the Bill, or at least bring forward On Amendment 44 on REACH—the registration, different language about what that participation means. evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals— It is pertinent to the point my noble friend Lord Fox which the noble Lord, Lord Fox, addressed, made. If it is the Government’s intention to participate the Government recognise the importance of the UK in many of these institutions, what do they envisage chemicals sector and its trade with the EU. We have that participation mechanism to be? If the Government set out our aim for a free trade area on goods, including are seeking to change Clause 6, they have to be clear chemicals, which will combine deep regulatory and about how they intend that participation to operate. customs co-operation with no tariffs or quotas. As such, the UK may choose to align with EU rules in Lord Bates: My noble friend Lady Fairhead made relevant areas, including the REACH regulation. In very clear our hesitation in the other place when this this context, we will also continue to explore with the amendment was proposed, but it is now in the Bill. We EU the possibility of co-operation between the UK see the commitment to all necessary steps in relation and the European Chemicals Agency, which is an to the European Medicines Agency. We have been very important part of that regime. clear that we do not wish to see that extended to other The noble Lord, Lord Foster of Bath, made an agencies, but it is there in the Bill at present. interesting point about the reputation of Ofcom, which Lord Purvis of Tweed: Just so that we know what of course we all recognise as a world-leading authority. might be coming on Report, is it the Government’s He then offered me a pretty difficult choice of choosing intention to bring forward amendments, as the noble between his persuasive speech and the words uttered Baroness, Lady Fairhead, said, to remove this? in Committee by my colleague in government, my noble friend Lord Ashton of Hyde. Given that I Lord Bates: Our position is simply that we are speak from the Government Benches, I am afraid committed to as close a relationship as possible with that I must side with my noble friend Lord Ashton in the European Medicines Agency. We see its value, we this regard. My noble friend wrote to the noble Lord 1157 Trade Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Trade Bill 1158 on 29 January on the Electronic Communications and EU without a deal. This will vary between member Wireless Telegraphy (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) states and within member states, where there will be Regulations 2019 and placed a copy in the Library— multiple regulators. perhaps the noble Lord has not had a chance to see The noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh, asked specifically that. However, I will relay the noble Lord’s comments about close participation in the European Medicines in this debate to my noble friend to see whether he is Agency. I think I have already dealt with that one and able to respond to that. I do not want to tempt further interventions at this The noble Baroness, Lady Kramer, talked about point. However, I am pleased that the Government equivalence for financial services. We are aiming to have been clear that we want to remain part of the build on the EU’s third-country equivalence regime. EMA, which will include remaining part of the falsified On medical isotopes, which the noble Lord, medicines directive. Lord Stevenson, mentioned on behalf of the noble Let me turn to horses—galloping into the final Lord, Lord Grantchester, and which my noble straight with Amendment 48. I am grateful to the friend Lord Lansley referred to, the observatory is not noble Baroness, Lady Hooper, who spoke particularly a formal institution of which a country can become a about polo, and the noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh. member. It is rather a European Commission body I also thank the noble Lord, Lord Risby, who talked which works with the medical nuclear industry to about his connections with Newmarket, and the monitor supplies of such medical materials. UK and noble Lord, Lord McNicol, who asked about this as other member states do not have formal membership. well. Amendment 48 dealt with the tripartite agreement None the less, I am pleased to confirm that the on the movement of horses. As part of our ongoing Government have committed to seek to continue UK preparations for EU exit, the Government aim to co-operation and information sharing with the observatory ensure that the movement of horses will continue with as part of the future economic partnership. However, minimal delay and bureaucracy, while safeguarding the exact capacity in which the UK continues to biosecurity and animal welfare. Let me reassure participate in the observatory is of course a matter for noble Lords that we are already working closely with the future negotiation. the equine industry to retain the benefits of the In addressing Amendment 63, on legal services, my tripartite agreement after the UK leaves the EU. The noble friends Lady McIntosh and Lady Hooper drew Government actively support a long-term industry-led from their experiences. The Government are committed proposal to allow horses of high health status from to supporting the legal services sector to continue to third countries to travel to the EU under the TPA grow. The Government are planning— arrangements. I had a note on the pet travel service. As part of the Lord Taylor of Holbeach (Con): Keep it going. ongoing preparations for EU exit, the Government aim to ensure that the movement of pets will continue Lord Bates: I reassure my noble friend the Chief with minimal inconvenience to pet owners while Whip that I have no problem in keeping it going for as safeguarding the UK’s biosecurity and the welfare long as he indicates is necessary—such has been the of travelling animals. We are already working closely quality of the debate. with stakeholders in the veterinary and pet travel I have had a note passed to me which might be industries to ensure that the benefits of the EU pet important. On Amendment 39, on mutual recognition travel scheme are retained after the UK leaves the of professional qualifications, I may have said “Ireland” EU. The Government will submit their application but I meant to say “Iceland”. I thank the officials for for listed status within the EU pet travel scheme being so attentive. imminently. The UK is seeking technical discussions with the European Commission on its application. Lord Fox: The Ireland/Iceland point is actually very Should the UK become a part 1 listed country, there important. The noble Lord, Lord Hain, made a point would be little change to current pet travel arrangements. earlier about cross-border activity—of midwives who Only minor changes to documentation would be live in the north of Ireland and practise in the Republic, needed. for example—which is now in jeopardy. I am less I hope that noble Lords will feel that in the time excited about Iceland, with all due respect, given that available I have dealt with as many issues as possible, the island of Ireland’s economy is driven on the ability and that the noble Lord will therefore consider to have the mutual recognition of all these skills. I withdrawing his amendment at this stage. enjoin the Government to work quickly on that one. Lord McNicol of West Kilbride: I have a good Lord Bates: The Government are very happy to 20-minute speech here—no, I am joking. I thank the give that undertaking. Minister for his response and all noble Lords and On legal services, raised by the noble Baronesses, Baronesses for their input to this rather large group of Lady McIntosh and Lady Hooper, the outcome of the amendments. As I said in my introduction, there is negotiations of course lies ahead of us, but I assure widespread support not just across the House but noble Lords that the Government will push very much outside, from organisations, businesses, trade unions for a strong relationship in this area. As EU and and relevant bodies. My takeaway from nearly all the EFTA lawyers will be subject to domestic rules in the contributions is the mutual benefit that organisations UK, UK lawyers in the EU and EFTA will be subject and businesses inside the UK would get from the to the national rules and regulations of individual adoption and inclusion of the amendments. The other EU and EFTA member states, if the UK leaves the word which came from the Government Bench was 1159 Trade Bill [LORDS] Trade Bill 1160

[LORD MCNICOL OF WEST KILBRIDE] Amendments 39 to 44 not moved. that their adoption would lead to continuity—a word that has been used many times in the previous two House resumed. days. With that, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment 38 withdrawn. House adjourned at 10.42 pm. GC 263 Offensive Weapons Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 264

Grand Committee traditional methods and for sporting, re-enactment purposes and religious reasons. Given these defences Wednesday 30 January 2019 and exemptions, it is possible that offensive weapons covered by Section 141 could be sold to a person under the age of 18. Amendment 40 therefore removes the Offensive Weapons Bill exclusion of offensive weapons covered by Section 141 Committee (2nd Day) from Section 141A of the 1988 Act. Amendments 48 to 53 to Clause 19 are directed to the same end. 3.45 pm Clause 19 defines a “bladed product”for the purposes The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Rogan) of the new offence of arranging delivery of a bladed (UUP): My Lords, if there is a Division in the Chamber product to a residential premise or locker under Clause 17. while we are sitting, the Committee will adjourn as “Bladed product” excludes any weapons in an order soon as the Division Bells are rung and will resume made under Section 141 of the 1988 Act. It is therefore after 10 minutes. possible that offensive weapons covered by Section 141 could be dispatched to a residential premise or locker on the basis that they were covered by one of the Amendment 40 exemptions or defences available to Section 141 articles— Moved by Baroness Williams of Trafford for example, if they were an antique or intended to be used for sporting purposes. Amendments 48 to 53 40: Before Clause 14, insert the following new Clause— therefore remove the exclusion of Section 141 from “Sale etc of bladed articles to persons under 18 Clause 19. (1) In section 141A of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (sale I hope that, with that explanation, noble Lords will etc of bladed articles to persons under 18), in subsection agree that these amendments sensibly close a gap in (3) (articles to which the section does not apply)— the existing law and the provisions in Clause 19. I beg (a) at the end of paragraph (a) insert “or”, and to move. (b) omit paragraph (b) and the “or” at the end of that paragraph. Baroness Hamwee (LD): My Lords, I am glad as (2) In Article 54 of the Criminal Justice (Northern Ireland) always to have the Government’s explanation for their Order 1996 (SI 1996/3160 (NI 24)) (sale of bladed amendments, and my comments are not about substance. articles to persons under 18), in paragraph (3) (articles to which the Article does not apply)— Earlier in the Bill as well as on this clause, I found that I spent quite a lot of time going to and fro between (a) at the end of sub-paragraph (a) insert “or”, and Section 141, the order, Section 141A and so on. That is (b) omit sub-paragraph (b) and the “or” at the end of okay for us—it is our job—but one would not like to that sub-paragraph.” think of members of the public having to scour through Member’s explanatory statement all this to find out what sort of offensive weapon they This new Clause would modify the offences of sale of a bladed might have. Will the Home Office give some thought article to a person under 18 in section 141A of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 and Article 54 of the Criminal Justice (Northern as to how they can produce a Keeling schedule for the Ireland) Order 1996. Currently these offences do not apply to public? weapons to which section 141 of the 1988 Act applies and the new Clause would remove that exception. Baroness Williams of Trafford: I can utterly appreciate the noble Baroness’s point. When I look at legislation, The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Williams I have to refer to other legislation, and it can be a of Trafford) (Con): My Lords, the purpose of the minefield, but such is the nature of legislation built up amendments in this group is to remove loopholes in over time. The guidance will help people in that endeavour the law relating to the sale of offensive weapons to and, as I said on Monday with reference to another persons under the age of 18. Amendment 40 amends issue, it will be very helpful to members of the public Section 141A of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, which in knowing exactly where the offences are and what prohibits the sale to a person under 18 of knives, knife aspects of the Bill strike out other aspects of legislation. blades, razor blades, axes and other articles with a blade or sharp point made or adapted for causing injury. The Duke of Montrose (Con): The noble Baroness The prohibition does not apply to weapons covered was on her feet very quickly but I hope that I can still by Section 141 of the 1988 Act. Section 141 prohibits ask a question. As was said a few minutes ago, this is a the supply of certain offensive weapons that are set bit like a Russian doll—you uncover one thing and it outinsecondarylegislation.Theseincludeknuckle-dusters, leads to another. Having been rather green on this push daggers and zombie knives, which are excluded subject, I would like to know where these exceptions from Section 141A on the basis that their supply, are contained, as I cannot find them in Section 141. including their sale, is already prohibited and therefore the prohibitions on their sale to a person under 18 and Baroness Williams of Trafford: They can be found their dispatch to a residential premise or locker is not in regulations associated with the Acts I have just relevant. mentioned. However, a significant number of exclusions and defences apply to the supply of weapons covered by Lord Tunnicliffe (Lab): I echo the remarks of the Section 141. These include an exemption for antique noble Baroness,Lady Hamwee.It is a problem throughout weapons and defences for swords with a curved blade our legislative activity; this is bad enough but FiSMA of 50 centimetres or more made before 1954 or by 2000 is even worse, having been amended so often. GC 265 Offensive Weapons Bill [LORDS] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 266

[LORD TUNNICLIFFE] as the actions you committed … This way of legislating for I hope that after the madness of Brexit has settled criminal justice is inappropriate and we should avoid it. We down, we can give some consideration to helping should certainly be very careful not to allow it to happen without these debates by providing richer Explanatory Notes, us spotting it and stopping it”.—[Official Report, 28/1/19; GC 153.] particularly where a single theme is being carried through. My Lords, we spotted it and we are trying to stop it. However, we have no objection to the amendment. I beg to move.

Amendment 40 agreed. Lord Judge (CB): My Lords, I agree—particularly with the last observation made by the noble Lord, Clause 14: Defence to sale of bladed articles to Lord Paddick. persons under 18: England and Wales Baroness Williams of Trafford: My Lords, as the noble Lord, Lord Paddick, says, these amendments Amendment 40A return us to the debate we had on Monday about the Moved by Lord Paddick proper construction of the offences in the Bill. We had 40A: Clause 14, page 14, line 8, leave out from beginning to a good discussion on Monday, and I will not cover the “they” in line 10 and insert “The seller is to be regarded as having ground in the same detail as I did then. taken all reasonable precautions and exercised all due diligence if” Amendment 40A would alter the defence provided Member’s explanatory statement in relation to the sale of bladed articles. Section 141A This amendment would provide for a statutory basis, in addition of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 provides that it is an to police and CPS discretion, to rely on reasonable precautions offence to sell, with some exceptions, articles with a and diligence before the seller is charged. blade or point to persons under the age of 18. It is a defence for a person charged with an offence to prove Lord Paddick (LD): In moving Amendment 40A in that he or she took all reasonable precautions and my name and that of my noble friend Lady Hamwee, I exercised all due diligence to avoid committing the offence. shall also speak to the other amendments in the group. Clause 14 modifies the operation of the defence in Amendment 40A is simply about the wording of the relation to remote sales to include a number of conditions legislation,somewhatcontrarytotheMember’sexplanatory that must be met as a minimum. Amendment 40A statement. The other amendments are similar to those removes the post-charge element of the defence and in our debate on Monday. Amendment 40A questions instead requires the enforcing agency to make a judgment the way in which proposed new subsection (3) of new whether the seller took all reasonable precautions Section 141B is worded. It currently states: before a charge is made. “The seller is not to be regarded as having proved that they I understand the noble Lord’s intention, but the took all reasonable precautions and exercised all due diligence to defence provided in the Criminal Justice Act 1988 has avoid the commission of the offence unless, as a minimum, they been in place for quite some time. I am not aware of prove that the following conditions are met”. any problems or concerns with how the police,prosecutors Surely it would be better to say that the seller is to be and the courts apply the legislation. It has been in regarded as having taken all reasonable precautions place for over 30 years, so it cannot be said that we are and exercised all due diligence to avoid the commission introducing a new construct into the criminal law. of an offence if, as a minimum, they prove that the following conditions are met. That is effectively putting Amendments 42A and 43F provide that failure to it positively rather than negatively. take all reasonable precaution in relation to the offence of delivering a bladed product to a residential address Amendments 42A, 43F, 57B and 57C again turn would be criteria to be taken into account before a the offences of delivering a bladed article to residential person is charged. This is in contrast to the defence premises and delivery of bladed articles to persons provided under Clause 18, which can be invoked when under 18 from those for which there is an offence if a person is charged with the offence. charged into offences where, if the accused has taken all reasonable precautions and exercised all due diligence Amendments 57B and 57C apply the same principles to avoid committing the offence, they do not commit to Clause 20, which is concerned with the delivery of an offence. We debated this way of legislating at our bladed articles sold by sellers based outside the UK. last sitting. In criminal law,there are two elements—actus Clause 20 applies to delivery companies that have reus and mens rea: the guilty act and the guilty mind. entered into an arrangement with a seller based abroad The offences in this Bill are completely without any and provides that it is a criminal offence for a delivery examination of the mens rea until after someone has company to deliver a bladed article into the hands of a been arrested, detained and potentially charged. As person under 18. It is a defence for a person charged this legislation is drafted, only after arrest and charge with an offence under Clause 20 to prove that he or is it necessary to consider the mens rea; it is a defence she took all reasonable precautions and exercised due for a person charged with an offence to prove that they diligence to avoid committing the offence. took all reasonable precautions and exercised all due In practice, the enforcing agency—the police, the diligence to avoid the commission of an offence. As CPS or local authorities—will always consider whether the noble and learned Lord, Lord Judge, said on the seller or the person who delivers the article has Monday, taken reasonable steps and exercised due diligence “we should stick to the normal principles that have worked well before bringing a charge. It would not be in the public for us: you are not guilty of anything and have not committed an interest to bring a prosecution if the enforcing agency offence unless your mental state was simultaneously as criminal considers that it is very likely the court will find that GC 267 Offensive Weapons Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 268 the seller had taken all reasonable precautions to avoid the business of small and medium-sized knife committing the offence. As I said before, this type of manufacturers and retailers here in the UK. As more defence has been in place for some considerable time and more sales move online, consumers normally expect in relation to the sale of articles with a blade or point, to receive their deliveries at home. My colleagues in and we are not aware of any issues in its operation. the Opposition fully support the aims of the Bill, but In short, the approach taken in the Bill both in have concerns that this is a legislative sledgehammer relation to knives and corrosives is well precedented. that will affect small and medium-sized businesses The existing law has operated for 30 years without here in the UK, while having very little impact on difficulties, and it would further complicate the law knife crime. To achieve the objectives we all want to and lead to confusion if we now adopted a different see delivered—a reduction in knife crime and violence, approach in the Bill. I suspect—as in the discussion on but at the same time not damaging or destroying Monday—noble Lords will want to return to this businesses—I suggest that we need a greater enforcement issue, but for now I ask the noble Lord to withdraw his of existing legislation that prohibits the sale of knives amendment. to under-18s and the carrying of a knife without good reason. The amendments we are debating will seek to Lord Paddick: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble enable good, well-run businesses to operate in a trusted and learned Lord, Lord Judge, for his brief intervention trader scheme, while not causing difficulties or putting and to the Minister for her response. their businesses at risk. The fact that the defence is similar to that in the I understand that the Home Office carried out a Criminal Justice Act 1988, but contrary to almost consultation between October and December 2017 on every other piece of legislation on the statute book, these issues, with more than 10,500 responses. On including the Prevention of Crime Act 1953 which 25 July, the Minister for Crime, Safeguarding and specifically deals with offensive weapons—that is, you Vulnerability, Victoria Atkins MP, wrote to my friend are not guilty if you have a reasonable excuse for your the Member for Sheffield Central in the other place, actions—does not persuade me, I am afraid, that the Mr Paul Blomfield MP. In her response, the Minister Government are right in this case and that we are indicated that there were concerns over the delivery of wrong. The Minister mentioned that the prosecuting knives purchased to residential premises, and concerns authorities would not bring a prosecution if the person about the sale of knives online to under-18s—which, had taken all reasonable steps, but that does not stop of course, is already illegal—but that some sellers were the person being arrested and detained before that not doing enough to stop children buying knives. charging decision is made. The problem is still there. It is contrary to most criminal law on the statute book My friend Paul Blomfield, Clive Betts and some and it is the current legislation, rather than the amendment, Sheffield knife manufacturers met the Minister on that adds to the confusion. We will return to this on 15 January. The department had looked at the trusted Report, but at this juncture I beg leave to withdraw the trader scheme, but seemed to rule it out on the basis amendment. that it would add more bureaucracy and burden to the businesses. They looked at placing the burden on Amendment 40A withdrawn. delivery companies, and the measures in this Bill. It is an offence under the Criminal Justice Act, as Clause 14 agreed. we know, to sell knives and other bladed products to a Clauses 15 and 16 agreed. person under the age of 18. But there is a defence if the person can prove that they took steps to make all 4 pm reasonable precautions and exercise due diligence to avoid committing an offence. The sellers will have to Clause 17: Delivery of bladed products to residential meet these conditions to rely upon that defence but premises etc the industry also agrees with the objectives of the Bill: to reduce knife crime and make it more difficult for people under the age of 18 to order knives. Many businesses Amendment 41 already exercise robust age-verification checks and label Moved by Lord Kennedy of Southwark their packets accordingly. Their concern is that the Bill’sprohibition on selling bladed products to residential 41: Clause 17, page 17, line 22, at end insert— premises will cause them particular damage. “(aa) the seller is not a trusted trader of bladed products, and” This is about the damage to small and medium-sized Member’s explanatory statement businesses, with its knock-on effect on UK manufacturers. This amendment would create a trusted trader status for those The larger retailers and a lot of companies often buy selling bladed products. their knives from overseas, so there is really no issue for them. But these small producers are selling niche Lord Kennedy of Southwark (Lab Co-op): My Lords, and often highly priced products, which are not sold Amendments 41 and 43 in the name of my noble anywhere by the large companies. The industry would friend Lord Tunnicliffe are intended to enable a trusted like some evidence. What is the evidence of people trader scheme and status to be set up for sellers of purchasing knives online to commit crime? Apparently, knives and other bladed products in the UK. As there are roughly 424 million knives in the UK at the drafted, the Bill will prohibit the delivery of bladed moment and there is little or no evidence that people objects and products to residential properties. The buy knives online to go out and commit a crime. There concern is that this will have a detrimental impact on are plenty of knives around everywhere.The Metropolitan GC 269 Offensive Weapons Bill [LORDS] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 270

[LORD KENNEDY OF SOUTHWARK] “Our information after consulting Royal Mail and UPS is that Police and the Cutlery and Allied Trades Research there are no means to quickly and robustly identify tradesmen Association have suggested that most knives used in who operate from home as opposed to individuals who might pose as tradesmen. These so-called defences are wish fulfilment violent crime are old knives, which people can get their from the Home Office and are unworkable in the real world”. hands on from a variety of sources. I agree. The trusted trader scheme would in effect mirror what is presently in place for the delivery of alcohol. Such a scheme would help to drive up standards Lord Lucas (Con): My Lords, I sympathise with the across the board while providing protection for responsible request made by the noble Lord, Lord Kennedy, for businesses. Coupled with better enforcement of existing some information from the Minister on why this clause legislation, the scheme would help and not impede will make anything better. I have been unable to find small and medium-sized enterprises. The industry wants any evidence that knives delivered in this way are a this, so the objection from the Government that it measurable, let alone a serious, source of supply for would mean more bureaucracy does not really hold knives used in offences. It seems entirely wrong to water for me. If there is a choice between a ban—not penalise ordinary people, particularly British traders, being able to sell your products for delivery to homes—and when no good will come out of it; it is mere virtue having a scheme which ensured that you verify who signalling by the Home Office. If this is a real danger, you are selling to, this would be better for them. I look let us deal with it properly—my next group of amendments forward to the Minister’s response. seeks to do that—but none of this is justified if it is not real. We have allowed age verification for sulphuric acid to be at the gate. What is the difference between Lord Paddick: My Lords, while I understand what that and a kitchen knife? They are equally dangerous the noble Lord, Lord Kennedy, is trying to do with his items; it is exactly the same process that one is asked to amendment, if he is quoting the Government correctly go through, and you get a system that is completely then I agree that it would be an expensive, bureaucratic sensible and useable by British traders. One can see scheme and difficult to enforce. It would be impossible the reasonableness of it. In other words, it is a small to enforce in relation to sellers outside the United addition to the bureaucracy that people go through Kingdom. It would be to the benefit of large retailers. for a small addition to safety. I do not see that the Perhaps the amendment is trying to appeal to the Government have produced any evidence to justify the Home Office’s usual approach to these things by saying approach that they are taking in this clause. that it should be self-financing. Membership of the scheme would clearly involve a fee; large retailers would easily find the money for that, whereas it would Viscount Goschen (Con): My Lords, I support what disadvantage small businesses. has been said by other speakers on this amendment. I As we discussed previously in relation to corrosive believe that we are engaged in something of a futile substances, we are again heading for a situation where pursuit in this part of the Bill. Hundreds of millions of UK sellers of bladed articles are unable to sell such knives are broadly available. This measure will not products for delivery to residential premises, whereas stop one single person getting hurt. I agree with an overseas sellers will be able to sell bladed articles for awful lot of what the Government are trying to do in delivery to home addresses. In the case of overseas the Bill. Flick-knives, zombie knives and products of sellers, the courier has to ensure age verification at that type are terrible and every effort should be made handover but UK sellers are unable to use this scheme. to prevent them being sold and held, but anyone can The real solution to the problem that the noble Lord put an edge on a screw driver,chisel or kitchen knife—they is trying to solve is to allow age verification at the are everywhere. handover of bladed articles at residential premises for We are using up parliamentary time to put in place all sellers, both UK and overseas, so that both corrosive regulations that are highly unlikely to make a contribution substances and bladed products can be delivered to to what we are all looking to achieve. The Government people’s homes. have to be careful not to bring the law into disrepute to As the noble Lord, Lord Kennedy, has just asked, pursue an easy target, when measures such as those what evidence is there that gang members, for example, highlighted by Members of the Committee far more are ordering ordinary kitchen knives, such as carving knowledgeable than me about the subject are needed knives, online in order to use them in crime? I am not to deal with the reality of people holding knives on the talking about prohibited knives, such as zombie knives street. There is a terrible epidemic of knife crime and I or the type of knife that the Government seek to ban empathise with all the measures being taken to stop it, in the Bill. The evidence from the police is that most but preventing the delivery of knives is unlikely to people carrying knives have got them from the kitchen have any effect in preventing a single stabbing incident. where they live because they are there already.Why would a criminal who is looking to commit knife crime create 4.15 pm an evidential trail by ordering online rather than going The Earl of Listowel (CB): My Lords, since our to a shop and paying cash to get their hands on a Grand Committee sitting on Monday we have heard weapon? I seek the Government’s explanation as to from the police that they identify 10,000 children who why this provision is necessary. are being exploited by organised crime to deliver drugs We discussed on Monday whether a residential in county lines. This is newish and important information premises is used for carrying on business. I have had a relevant to this debate as an important conduit for communication from a company that deals with the children to access knives. On Monday we debated sale of bladed items online. It says: mandatory sentences for children. We are hearing that GC 271 Offensive Weapons Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 272 children are being groomed to deliver drugs and are there is still a high rate of failure should be a matter of provided with weapons—not guns, but knives and so concern to noble Lords and tell us that the provisions on. This may put a very different complexion on our in the Bill are needed. It is not enough for retailers debate. Will the Minister provide the Committee with selling remotely simply to ask the purchaser to tick a a note before Report responding to this new information box to say that they are over 18. It is unacceptable in the context of our discussions on mandatory sentencing when it comes to delivering the article simply to hand for children? it over to a person without verifying their age or, worse, simply to push the package through the letter Baroness Williams of Trafford: My Lords, I thank box or leave it on the doorstep without any checks the noble Lord, Lord Kennedy, for explaining the about the age of the recipient. We know the tragic trusted trader scheme. I hope to set out the context of consequences of not having strong checks in place to the provisions of the Bill. I agree with the Committee preventunder-18sbuyingknivesonline,fromthebeginning that evidence is important to this end. of the transaction through to the end of the sale process. It is already an offence to sell a knife to somebody I utterly understand the thinking behind the noble under the age of 18, but we know that some sellers are Lord’s amendment, but it would in effect transfer the not doing enough to stop children buying knives online. responsibility for complying with the legislation and Evidence from online test purchase operations shows responsible sales from the seller to the Government, that a worrying number of online sellers sampled by requiring the Government to set out the details of failed to have effective age-verification procedures in the proposed trusted trader scheme, which would then place. Trading standards conducted two online test allow for the delivery of bladed products to residential purchase operations in 2008 and 2009. A test purchase addresses.The scheme would require sellers to demonstrate operation commissioned by the Home Office conducted that their age-verification systems and procedures, in 2014 showed that 69% of the retailers sampled from the point when they receive the order to when failed the test. This was a slight improvement on the their designated delivery company hands the item over exercise five years previously but showed that a large at the point of delivery, are robust and that it is not majority of online test purchases failed and retailers possible that a knife will be handed to a person under were breaking the law. 18. In the light of the results of recent test purchase A further test purchase operation was carried out operations, however, we are not persuaded that sellers in December 2016. The results showed that 72% of can provide such reassurance in a systematic and retailers tested failed to verify the age of the purchaser consistent way. We believe that only by requiring age at the point of accepting the order and only 19% went verification at the point where the item is physically on to require further evidence of age and refuse the handed to a person, at a dedicated collection point, is sale when the evidence was not produced. Recent test it possible to guarantee that a bladed product will not purchases targeting online retailers conducted in late be handed over to a person under 18. 2018 under the Government’s new prosecution fund There is another point. Setting up, administering show that 42% of the retailers sampled failed the test and overseeing a trusted trader scheme would create and sold knives to persons under the age of 18. We burdens of its own, although I accept the point made have evidence that online retailers are selling to people by the noble Lord, Lord Paddick, that it could be under the age of 18. self-funding.

Lord Paddick: Can the Government give any evidence Lord Paddick: That is not what I said. about how many under-18s are buying knives online Baroness Williams of Trafford: I am sorry—well, I other than those people masquerading as being under would have accepted the point. In addition, simply 18 and carrying out test purchase operations? being part of a scheme or being in possession of a seal of approval as a trusted trader does not guarantee Baroness Williams of Trafford: All the information compliance with the conditions in the scheme. I hope I have is the test purchases. If test purchases show a that I have been able to set out the Government’s failure in the system, that suggests to me that there is explanations— an ongoing failure in the system. It does not matter whether the person is actually 18 or is pretending to Lord Paddick: I am grateful to the noble Baroness be; if the system is failing, the system is failing. If an for giving way.She repeated something that she mentioned online seller is selling to someone who says they are on Monday, which I questioned but did not receive a under 18, the system is failing and the Government are response on. Why is age verification at the point of concerned by that. We know that test purchases show handover at a delivery point likely to be more thorough that under-18s are being sold knives. In most cases, it or more successful than age verification at the point of is not possible to determine whether the knife purchased handover at the front door of a residential premises? is being used in crime, but we have evidence that young The noble Lord, Lord Lucas, suggested a scheme people say that buying a knife online is easy. That whereby the delivery agent would take a photograph information was obtained when we were researching of the driving licence or passport to show proof of age the knife-free campaign. at the front door. I accept from what the noble Baroness We know through the test purchases that the sellers has said that the age-verification process that online are breaking the law and we hear the evidence from retailers put in place must be thorough and rigorous young people. With the provisions in the Bill, we are and that there must be penalties for those who fail to sending a clear signal to online sellers that their age- comply, but I do not understand the blanket ban on verification processes must improve. The fact that delivery to residential premises when people have carte GC 273 Offensive Weapons Bill [LORDS] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 274

[LORD PADDICK] Baroness Williams of Trafford: I have provided the blanche to order online and collect from what could detail on the test purchase failures. To return to my be a local newsagent. Last week, I ordered something noble friend the Duke of Montrose on how many from Amazon and collected it from a convenient store persons or companies who sold knives to under-18s where the people are very busy. I do not see what have actually been prosecuted, I understand that there advantage there is, when it comes to age verification, have been 71 prosecutions between 2013 and 2017 for such an article to be handed over at a collection under Section 141A of the Criminal Justice Act. If I point rather than at the front door of a residential have any further information for the noble Lord, Lord premises. Paddick, I will certainly put it in writing. I hope I have given a general overview of some of the failures within Earl Attlee (Con): My Lords, I do not want to be the system of the online sale. unhelpful to my noble friend the Minister, but can she point to any cases involving knife crime where the Lord Lucas: My Lords, I am still at a loss as to why knife was acquired online? we have two systems in this Bill—Clause 4 and Clause 17 —applying to products which the Government say Baroness Williams of Trafford: I am sure that I are equally dangerous. If we need Clause 17—prohibition could point to such cases if I had them in front of me. of delivery to residential premises for knives—why are What I can point to is the evidence I have just given to we not asking for that with corrosive products? What the Committee that young people have said it is easier is the difference? to buy knives online. I am not saying those young people are the ones going on to commit crimes, but the Lord Paddick: I think I may be able to help the fact that it is easier for an under-18 to purchase online Committee. The noble Lord is right that we are in a says to me that it is an easier route, should that person parallel situation, but you cannot order online from a have criminal intent, to make that purchase online. UK company and have corrosive substances delivered I hope that is helpful to my noble friend. to your home address.You can order corrosive substances from a company that is outside the UK and have them The Duke of Montrose: Will the Minister tell us delivered to your home address. The parallel situation what sanctions have been imposed on people failing to also applies with knives, which shows how absolutely obey the law in this way? It seems to me that there is ridiculous this whole thing is. plenty of scope for people to be charged. That will still apply. On the trusted trader scheme, perhaps the one 4.30 pm point that has not been mentioned is that the designation could be taken away were there any doubt that somebody Lord Lucas: I am clearly reading Clause 4 wrong. It was not complying with the law, rather than having to appears to permit delivery to residential premises. I go through some legal process that might deter people am sure the noble Lord has read the clause better than or make them more certain to check. me. It just appears to ask for age verification when it is delivered. Baroness Williams of Trafford: I hope that I have outlined what the Government have found through Baroness Williams of Trafford: The noble Lord, these test purchase failings. They have improved over Lord Paddick, is right. I am very grateful to him recent years, but there is undoubtedly a basic failure in because now I do not have to explain it. the system of the online purchase. Regarding the sanction for current failures in the system, it is a criminal offence, although it has been shown not to be Lord Kennedy of Southwark: I thank all noble Lords a terribly compliant environment. It is far easier to who have spoken in this short debate. I probably forgot have robust arrangements in place at a central delivery to ask the Minister to meet a delegation of Sheffield point rather than on each and every doorstep. That is MPs and businesses concerned before Report. I am sure the thinking behind the delivery point rather than the she will. residential address. There have been some really interesting figures in this debate. We have 424 million knives in circulation Lord Paddick: I am grateful to the Minister. There and 71 prosecutions of companies selling knives online is no such thing as a central delivery point. When you incorrectly.If the Bill goes ahead, we will ban businesses ask for these articles to be delivered to a delivery operating in the UK selling knives online, but if they point, they are all over the place. There are five within are based in France, Germany or the United States, it a mile of where I live—corner shops are the places will be fine—off you go, no problem at all. That is where these items are being delivered. In support of some of the nonsense that we have here. that, does the Minister have any information on these I respect the Minister very much, but I was disappointed test purchase operations? Specifically, how many of by her response. I do not believe she has made the case these knives were successfully delivered to somebody for this. As other noble Lords have said, we are not who appeared to be under the age of 18 at a residential convinced that this part of the Bill will do what it premises, and in how many of the offences were the seeks to achieve. If that is the case, I would be very knives delivered to a collection point? This might provide happy if it were not in the Bill at all. I moved this the evidence that the Government seem to have that it amendment because the industry is keen to avoid this is much safer for it to be delivered to a collection point ban and to have something else in place, and it has than to the front door of a home. been working with Sheffield MPs on this.This amendment GC 275 Offensive Weapons Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 276 was put forward in the Commons and I have put it situation where young people become both victims forward again today. This is not a scheme we have and perpetrators of knife crime, both in self-defence dreamed up. and, perhaps, more maliciously.I thank him for making These businesses sell niche products that are not that point. available in most shops. If you go into a big shop, the knives in them are likely to have been made in China The Earl of Listowel: I wonder how the Minister and elsewhere. These are businesses whose products can say that young people are forced to carry knives have not been bought by high street retailers and for their own protection and, at the same time, bring in which now survive by selling their products online. We mandatory prison sentences for children who carry are now going to make that harder for them without knives. There does not seem to be much consistency in any particular evidence that it is causing problems. If that. I do not expect the Minister to respond but, if you are going to go out and commit crime with a children are feeling forced to carry knives in fear for knife, where would you go? I would go to my knife their own safety, how can one introduce mandatory drawer at home—I have a load of knives in there. That prison sentences—they have already been introduced— is what people would do. I do not believe that people for children who carry knives? It seems a bit of a puzzle are buying these knives online to commit crimes. As to me. the noble Lord, Lord Paddick, said, they would be creating an evidence trail if they are then hauled up. For me, that is a problem. Baroness Williams of Trafford: The challenge is to get to a situation where children do not feel they need Baroness Williams of Trafford: I hope the noble to carry knives for their protection or in order to Lord will not mind if I intervene on that point. He is attack others. right that, if you want to commit knife crime, you could go to your kitchen drawer and probably get a Lord Kennedy of Southwark: I thank my noble friend fairly effective weapon out of it. But that is not the for that point, although I am not sure that I agree with nub of this legislation or of what we are trying to him. achieve. There are a number of interventions we are As I was saying, I do not believe the Government trying to make. I think I explained right at the outset have made their case on this.Wehave seen 71 prosecutions when I introduced the Bill that no one intervention is and the evidence here. There are issues with knives and going to solve the problem in and of itself. It is the we all want to see knife crime reduced. This is the range of measures that we have in place, including this classic case of the Government using a sledgehammer legislation, that we hope will reduce what has become to crack a nut. a scourge in society which is blighting the lives of young people. The Minister nodded to say that she would be happy to meet the Sheffield MPs and knife manufacturers. Lord Harris of Haringey (Lab): My Lords, I should This is about the high-end, niche manufacturers who first declare an interest as chair of National Trading do not, or very rarely, sell their products in UK stores Standards which is a recipient of Home Office money any more but almost wholly online. We will potentially and was responsible for the test purchases that have damage their businesses but, at the same time, allow been talked about. However,I do not intend to comment firms abroad to sell here with no restrictions whatever. on the detail of those test purchases—partly because I That is regrettable. have not been briefed on them—but to make a specific I will leave it there for now. I will bring this issue back point on the comment of the noble Lord, Lord Paddick, on Report—I guarantee that—but before then we can about creating an evidence trail. have that meeting and try to persuade the Government One of the issues of concern is young people who to look at this again. I beg leave to withdraw the decide they need to carry a knife notionally for their amendment. protection. It is not that they intend to use it, but they carry it for their protection and unfortunately it then Amendment 41 withdrawn. gets used. One has to be particularly concerned about that category of person. They may well have a careful Amendment 42 parent who would notice the disappearance of a knife Moved by Lord Lucas from a knife drawer, or they may believe that they would be stopped or other social pressures be applied 42: Clause 17, page 17, line 24, at end insert— if they tried to get one in a way other than online; they “( ) For the purposes of this section a person in the United would therefore be attracted to the online route. So Kingdom is to be regarded as a seller if they perform while this particular mechanism may or may not be the fulfilment functions for a seller outside the United Kingdom.” most effective way of dealing with it, this is the category of person one should be concerned about. It is about Member’s explanatory statement dealing not with those who are intent on committing This amendment is intended to ensure that UK fulfilment operations are liable under the Bill. knife crime but those who seek to have a knife that no one else knows about, which they can carry with them, because they think it will defend them. Lord Lucas: My Lords, in moving Amendment 42 I will also speak to Amendments 54 and 57. I am Baroness Williams of Trafford: The noble Lord grateful to my noble friend the Minister for educating makes a very good point. Young people are being me in the course of the last amendment. I apologise forced to carry knives for protection. We have an awful for my misreading of the Bill. GC 277 Offensive Weapons Bill [LORDS] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 278

[LORD LUCAS] delivered by ordinary post. How does the post office If we are going to take online purchase and delivery know what is in the parcel? One can think of circumstances so seriously, we must deal with overseas purchases. where they would not know what is being delivered. While the noble Lord was speaking, I managed In relation to Amendment 54, I understand that successfully to order a pretty nasty-looking knife online. there is a scheme for firearms and you need a licence There was no hint of age verification. It appeared to before you can import them. But if you order a set of be a British company that I was ordering from but, cutlery to use for Sunday lunch from a German actually, I happen to know that this company is based manufacturer, which includes knives, do you need an in Holland. The knife will be shipped from Holland by import licence in order to buy it and have it delivered ordinary post. How will this be prevented? The company to your home? The problem here is that firearms are a is a big, well-known retailer of knives online. It is an very narrow type of good, whereas knives cover a ordinary place that a lot of people know; it carries a whole spectrum—I think we get on to palette knives good variety of knives and other things. Nothing in and butter knives later—through to zombie knives and this Bill, as it is at the moment, prevents someone very dangerous items. ordering in that way. I come back to the issue that if it is a foreign seller, I am not saying that my amendments have any the Bill has to provide that age verification has to particular merit in the mechanisms they propose. But happen at the front door of residential premises. If the if the Government are serious about this, we need to Government are placing so much weight on preventing tackle things that are obviously going to happen and under-18s getting hold of knives generally, why that make it possible for us to prevent—since the Government age verification at the front door of a residential are convinced that this needs preventing—the delivery premises can … not also apply to UK sellers as it does of knives that are ordered with great ease and facility to overseas sellers? from overseas suppliers. 4.45 pm First, we should deal with fulfilment in this country. Amazon has a very large fulfilment business. You appear Lord Harris of Haringey: My Lords, I had not to be purchasing goods from an overseas supplier, but really intended to intervene but I have come here and actually they are sitting in an Amazon warehouse, it is a fascinating series of amendments. where the instruction comes through and they dispatch. The amendment in the name of the noble Lord, There are a number of independent people in the Lord Lucas, is an extremely interesting one and has fulfilment business too; they know exactly what they much wider ramifications than the purposes for which are sending out. They are the ones who do the packing, he has put it forward. There is a real issue—again, I and must be caught by this legislation. We cannot refer to my interests as chair of National Trading allow that obvious loophole—that is my purpose in Standards—about fulfilment houses in relation to all Amendment 42. sorts of trading standards offences and issues. The When we are dealing with standard imports by noble Lord talks about Amazon, but that is at the post, we have systems to prevent people sending in upper end of the fulfilment house market. There are guns. It is a fairly obvious thing, to make sure that if plenty of fulfilment houses that have essentially been guns are coming in postal packages, you intercept set up by people in their front rooms. I am not sure them. People who are shipping them in bulk in engine which of those is more or less likely to know the blocks are a different kettle of fish, but wrapping one content and precise nature of some of the orders they up and sending it as a parcel is something which we are fulfilling. There are a lot of attractions in going in believe there are mechanisms to deal with. Those the direction that the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, wants mechanisms will work for knives, but we need to us to go, which would place an obligation on that empower the border authorities when they come to stage of the distribution process as well as on the point their notice to open the packages, confiscate the knives of sale. But I suspect it raises much wider issues around and not compensate anyone. It needs to be easy for how other laws—for example, consumer protection our border security people to do, in the same way that laws—would apply to fulfilment houses. it is not easy for someone to send guns through the I would quite like to see fulfilment houses having to post. That is what I am trying to do in Amendment 54: take some of that responsibility, but it is the same to replicate or allow for the replication of the system argument about internet service providers taking that we have for controlling guns sent through the responsibility for the content of what appears on their post, and extend that to blades sent through the post. services. There is a lot to be said for that as well. I suspect, however, that tackling the issue may not sit In Amendment 57, I am merely trying to strengthen easily in this Bill, as opposed to perhaps a rather more the contractual obligation that people are under when they widespread look at the role of fulfilment houses—an are delivering these things; they cannot pretend, like area that will grow inevitably with the increase of the three monkeys, that they did not know that they online markets. should have taken sensible steps to know that they are dealing with a seller who deals in bladed products, and Lord Tunnicliffe: I want merely to thank the noble therefore need to take care. I beg to move. Lord, Lord Lucas, for putting forward a proposition which means that the Government have to give a comprehensive answer to it. Lord Paddick: I see what the noble Lord is trying to do with Amendment 42, but again I am not sure it is a Baroness Williams of Trafford: I would hope the practical solution. He talked about buying a knife noble Lord thinks the Government always try to give from a company in Holland where it is going to be comprehensive answers to things raised. GC 279 Offensive Weapons Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 280

Moving swiftly on, Amendment 42 would in effect The Government’s intention is not to stop people extend the offence created by Clause 17, which is buying bladed products or bladed articles in general. concerned with the delivery of bladed products to We want only to stop these items being sold and/or residential premises, to any UK-based company that delivered to people under the age of 18. In relation to assists in the process between the sale of the item over remote sales, the Bill already provides for measures to the internet and the delivery of the item to the buyer achieve this aim. It does this in relation to domestic where they provide fulfilment functions. I will take a sales through the provisions in Clause 17 and in relation minute to explain fulfilment functions. to sellers based abroad through Clause 20. A licensing We understand what my noble friend is referring to: scheme is likely to place burdens on sellers and, either activities such as stocking, dispatching the order,customer directly or indirectly, on local and central government, service and returns for sellers outside the UK. In the which will need to provide administration of the scheme Bill, the word “seller” carries its normal meaning and and monitor compliance. is therefore unlikely to cover circumstances where an My noble friend is rightly concerned about whether overseas seller uses a platform in this country to complete the Bill provides adequate provisions to prevent bladed or facilitate the transaction, if the company here is not articles from sellers based abroad being delivered to involved in its actual sale. The offence created by persons under 18. I believe that the provisions in the Clause 20 is intended to address the issue of overseas Bill are adequate to achieve this end. I state again that sellers. The Government are of the view that it would we cannot enforce the legislation against sellers based be a step too far to apply Clause 17 to companies that abroad, but we can place the onus on the person who provide a fulfilment function but are not themselves delivers the merchandise here. That is the reason the sellers. The Government expect that companies why Clause 20 introduces an offence for a delivery facilitating sales online will make sellers who use their company to deliver a bladed article into the hands of platforms aware of the legislation in relation to the sale a person under the age of 18. If a bladed article is of knives in the UK, but it is not in their power to being delivered on behalf of a seller based abroad, the compel a seller based abroad—or in the UK, for that delivery company has the responsibility to ensure that matter—to comply with the legislation. They can, of the item is not handed over to a person under 18, course, remove the seller from their platforms if they whether the item is delivered to a private address or to fail to comply with UK legislation. I hope that they a collection point. consider doing so, as sellers that do not comply with Finally, Amendment 57 is concerned with the online the law will damage the reputation of their company. sale of bladed articles by sellers based abroad. It This does not mean that sellers based abroad, whether would prevent bladed articles from being delivered to they use online platforms or sell directly, will not be under-18s by ensuring that the deliverer takes adequate affected, albeit indirectly, by the provisions in the Bill. precautions to ensure that this does not happen. As I Wecannot enforce legislation on to sellers based abroad, indicated, we cannot apply Clause 17 to sellers who and that is why Clause 20 introduces an offence for a are beyond the jurisdiction of UK law and our courts. delivery company to deliver a bladed article into the hands Sellers based abroad may not be able to determine of a person under the age of 18. Where a platform when they sell a bladed article whether the delivery provides a fulfilment function relating to delivery, address is residential or business or whether the seller Clause 20 may apply to them. is under 18—indeed, they may not care. That is why Amendment 54 seeks to introduce measures to Clause 17 will not apply to sellers based abroad. ensure that imports of bladed products from sellers The Government consider that it is fair and based abroad are subject to checks. This is achieved by proportionate to adopt a different approach in relation introducing a licensing scheme for bladed products as to delivery of items from sellers based in the UK. In defined in Clause 19. The scheme would require importers the case of UK-based sales, the Clause 17 offence is to have a licence. The amendment would therefore committed by the seller, not the person who delivers have the effect of limiting the number of persons who the article. We think that this is a sensible and practical would be able to import these items. At the moment, approach, which will go further in restricting the sale anyone can buy bladed products from abroad. However, of these items to under-18s. Clause 20 deals specifically if a licence were required, only licensed buyers would with sellers based abroad and the offence is committed be able to import these items. by the person who makes the delivery in the UK, who, I believe that the amendment—the noble Lord, in this instance, will be the person within the jurisdiction Lord Paddick, was quick to click on to this—has been of the UK courts. This addresses the perennial problem modelled on the registered firearms dealer scheme. of tackling illegal sales made by those based abroad However, as the noble Lord pointed out, there are who can otherwise circumvent the intent of our domestic significant differences between firearms and bladed legislation. products,as bladed products have much wider application. Whereas it is desirable to have a control mechanism to Lord Garnier (Con): Clause 20(1)(d) requires that, ensure that only authorised persons can import firearms, “that person was aware when they entered into the arrangement I am not persuaded that it would be proportionate to that it covered the delivery of bladed articles”. introduce a similar scheme for bladed products. Everyday Is there any provision which requires a foreign exporter products present in most households, such as a wide of bladed instruments to identify on the outside of the range of knives, gardening tools and the like, are packaging what is inside it so that nobody can be in capable of being bladed products. These items can be any doubt that what is being posted from, let us say, purchased in the UK freely without a licence, provided Holland is a knife with a 10-inch blade? If it says on that the buyer is over 18. the outside of the packet, “This is a butter knife”—subject GC 281 Offensive Weapons Bill [LORDS] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 282

[LORD GARNIER] My noble friend Lord Lucas asked how one proves to one believing the description on the label—that an address—we went over that on Monday a couple of might prevent a number of the problems that we seem times. There are various ways in which a seller can to have been discussing. It seems fairly simple to stick ascertain whether a premises is used as a business. The a label on the outside which places the burden on the buyer could provide evidence that their house was original seller, makes the importer or functionary aware registered for business purposes or confirmation in of what they are handling and makes the postman or writing of their business entity and that their business parcel deliverer to the address or corner shop concerned was run from home. equally aware of what is going on. It could not cost very much to stick a label on. 5 pm Lord Kennedy of Southwark: I think the Minister Lord Kennedy of Southwark: The noble Lord make referred to premises that are registered for business a very valid point. I shall certainly read Hansard purposes. That could be a home, could it not? If I carefully, because some of the Minister’s responses work from home, knives could be delivered to my may have been contradictory. If I was a manufacturer home. of high-end knife products in Holland or Germany, I would be very pleased when the Bill became law Baroness Williams of Trafford: The noble Lord is because I could then launch a big campaign. I would right that a house could be registered for business know that the British Government were attempting to purposes because it could be a business. I think we hamstring manufacturers in their own county but that went through that on Monday. Clause 20 creates an I could carry on selling this stuff with no problem at offence relating to overseas sales, with the focus on all. We have no jurisdiction beyond our own borders. ensuring that the delivery company does not deliver a All we are doing here is hurting British business on the bladed article into the hands of a person under the age basis of very little evidence. of 18. I think that was all I was going to say on the subject and the amendments. I know that the foreign Lord Lucas: My Lords, as usual, I need educating. company versus the UK company issue will come back How is even a British business to know that a particular again and again, but I hope the noble Lord will be address is residential? What source of information do happy to withdraw his amendment. the Government expect a seller of knives to use to establish whether, for instance, 1 Lavender Hill SW11 Lord Kennedy of Southwark: On that point, this is is a residential or business address, particularly when very anti-British business for no obvious reason or in such a location there is probably a shop on the benefit for anybody concerned. If I were a German ground floor and flats above? What source of information company or a French company, I would be delighted will be reliable and satisfactory in a prosecution for with this legislation. someone to demonstrate that they believed reasonably that it was not a residential premises? Baroness Williams of Trafford: The noble Lord will know that the last thing this Government want to do is Baroness Williams of Trafford: We had that debate to make things difficult for British companies, but we on Monday, but I am happy to go over it again. On my want to clamp down on some of the terrible effects of noble and learned friend’s point about labelling bladed knife crime. products, it would be very good practice if foreign sellers did that, but we do not have the legal jurisdiction to make them do it. Lord Lucas: My Lords, the Government have certain contradictions in the way they are approaching this. Suppose a Dutch company sells a knife to a residential Lord Garnier: I am sorry to be tiresome and to address. It drops it into the post, nicely wrapped as a interrupt yet again. We could prevent the import of a parcel with nothing on the outside to indicate what the parcel or the continuance of its progress if it arrived at contents are. Who puts the contents of a parcel on the Dover, Felixstowe or wherever it might be with no outside? I cannot recall when a package came to me label on. It could then be held up. If on the other hand containing something I had ordered over the internet it said on the outside, “butter knife”—assuming that which said obviously on the outside what was on the we could trust the writer of the label—or “hand grenade” inside. The Royal Mail, which looked at this, has no or “sharp knife”, the answer seems self-evident. ability to know that the parcel contains a bladed product. The only point at which it becomes possible Baroness Williams of Trafford: My noble and learned to know that is at the point of importation. friend would have a very good point if it was clear that I know the Government have systems—and I know the object contained in the package was a knife. It what they are, but I am not going to describe them in becomes a lot more difficult where it is not clear what public—for preventing the importation of weapons, is in the package. I do not disagree with him that it firearms in particular, which would apply very nicely would be good to label such packages, but we cannot to the importation of knives. That is the point at compel foreign companies to do it and it might not which we as a country know that there is a knife, and always be clear what is in the package to stop it at the since the Government have oversight of the process port. My noble friend makes a very practical suggestion—I through which it is being imported, that is the point at am sorry to be the blocker of practical suggestions—but which they can establish whether the address is likely that is the explanation. to be residential premises. If we want this to be an GC 283 Offensive Weapons Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 284 effective prohibition against a company abroad sending to get a foreign supplier to comply with British law; a knife to a residential address here, we need to give rather, it is internationally accepted that you need to those authorities the power to confiscate the knife put a customs label on a package describing what is at that point. I propose one way of doing that, and inside. I do not know whether that applies if the there are surely many others, but we absolutely need to supplier is within the European Union, but certainly if do it. you buy something from the United States of America, The other way in which an overseas sale can get for example, there has to be a visible customs declaration into residential premises is if I apparently order from a on the outside to say what the product inside the website abroad. That website abroad telegraphs its parcel is. That would enable whoever is delivering the fulfilment house here and someone in that fulfilment parcel to the end delivery point to take the appropriate house takes the knife out of a box, puts it in a action in accordance with Clause 20, if the label package, addresses it and pops it into the post. There describes that it is a bladed product. we have someone absolutely within our jurisdiction who knows that it is a knife and who should know that The Duke of Montrose: If noble Lords will allow the premises are residential, but we are not catching me, rather than pointing out what might be missed by them. We cannot expect the poor old postman to this legislation, I want to draw to the attention of the know what is in the package. We have two very good Committee places where people will be caught. One opportunities to intercept knives and other bladed that strikes me, given my background of having been products coming in from abroad. I do not mind how responsible for the sheep industry, is this. In the clipping the Government achieve that, but it is so easy to get of sheep, we use largely foreign clippers, often from knives from abroad. If someone really wants to get a New Zealand. They come here and stay in bed and knife delivered to residential premises all they have to breakfasts. As they move around, their blades have to do is order it from overseas and it will happen without be sharpened and replaced. I am sure that, in the current interruption because sellers will organise themselves system, they just ask the company to supply it by so they do not get their delivery agents into trouble. post, but they do not have a residential address. They They will just use the Royal Mail. These are small items could probably work their way round it, but I want to that do not require special delivery and fit through highlight the problems that people will have. postboxes. The amendments show that there are good, easy, The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Lexden) efficient and effective ways in which the Government (Con): Is it the noble Lord’s wish to withdraw his can get a bite on the main streams of supply from amendment? overseas agents. As my noble friend said, overseas agents will respond by sticking a label on the outside. If that is what they are asked to do, and if that is what Lord Lucas: I was still mid-flow. Having allowed it takes to get it through customs, that is fine—in those interventions,I very much hope that the Government supplying all over the world, they are used to customs will listen to the noble Lord, Lord Kennedy,and consider regulations. This is not hard or expensive for us to do; whether there is something we can do here. it is easy, and it is the only thing that makes sense of I know that there is a system of customs declarations the Government’s interest in stopping the ordering of and that misdeclaration on small packages is responsible knives over the internet. If we stop only UK sellers for the UK losing about £1 billion in VAT every year. I and leave the door wide open to overseas sellers, we am not confident, therefore, in that system—someone are not achieving anything other than obstructing has to check what is inside. We have the ability to do it, UK business. and I agree that a bad customs declaration would result in inaction. But, by and large, we do not open Lord Kennedy of Southwark: Does the noble Lord small packages to see what is inside, or else we would agree that the Committee generally agrees with the be better at collecting the VAT when something said to laudable aims of the Bill but on all sides we are be worth 5p is actually worth 50 quid. highlighting the large holes in it? It is easy to make a We can do better in preventing knives coming in mockery of what is being set out here. I hope that the from overseas. I very much hope that the Government Government will listen carefully to this. We want to will look again at the opportunities. I beg leave to have discussions between now and Report so that we withdraw the amendment. can get this legislation right. Where we are at the moment is honestly ridiculous. The more discussions I hear now, the worse things seem to me. The Deputy Chairman of Committees: I apologise to the noble Lord for trying to cut short his remarks. Lord Paddick: I echo the noble Lord’s comments. Wewant to do whatever it takes to reduce the availability Amendment 42 withdrawn. of knives for use in knife crime. I hope that, in all our discussions, it has not gone unnoticed that we oppose Amendments 42A and 43 not moved. this group of amendments and the previous group. I will probably be disciplined by my party for saying Amendment 43A so but, presumably, if you are buying from a supplier outside the customs union, there needs to be a customs Moved by Baroness Hamwee declaration on the package as to what is contained in 43A: Clause 17, page 17, line 37, after “solely” insert “or it. That is a legal requirement. It is not about trying principally” GC 285 Offensive Weapons Bill [LORDS] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 286

Member’s explanatory statement craftsperson in a shed. Weheard during the consultation The purpose of this amendment, along with the amendments from builders, plumbers and others who ran businesses to page 17, lines 38 and 41, is to probe the extent to which the from their homes. These people sometimes needed to offence in Clause 17(2) covers delivery to a person who works have tools and other bladed products delivered to from home. them quickly to allow them to carry on their businesses. We were also keen to ensure that farms would not be Baroness Hamwee: My Lords, in moving this affected by the prohibition on delivery to residential amendment I will speak also to Amendments 43B and premises. This point was made on Monday by the 43C. We are still on the issue of residential premises, noble Earl, Lord Erroll, and again today by the noble and I will not go down the route of customs declarations Duke, the Duke of Montrose. or indeed of the Immigration Bill as it might apply to Toachieve this, the definition of a residential premises New Zealand sheep-clippers and so on. There are a lot at Clause 17(5) is limited to those that are, of aspects that could be raised. “used solely for residential purposes”. On Monday, the noble Earl, Lord Erroll, asked This means that anyone who runs a business from their about farm-houses. The noble Lord, Lord Lucas, and home can continue to have bladed products delivered my noble friend Lord Paddick asked how you know there. To put this beyond any doubt, Clause 17(6) about residential premises. My noble friend, referring explicitly states that, where a business is carried on to UPS and Royal Mail, quoted comments made by a from a premises, it is not to be regarded as a residential company in this sector about unworkability in the real premises. I hope this addresses the example that the world. The Minister convinced me on Monday about noble Baroness gave; her face suggests that she is not not wanting to criminalise Royal Mail through my entirely convinced. amendment. She mentioned then that Clause 17(6) was there to satisfy concerns about small traders— Amendments 43A, 43B and 43C would achieve the individual craftspeople and those running relatively same effect but are unnecessary. Where a person runs small businesses from home. I would like to raise a business from residential premises which they own aspects of that in this group of amendments. or occupy, the Bill already ensures that they can have bladed products delivered to such premises. It will be The first of my amendments would provide that for the seller to satisfy themselves that they are not residential premises are premises used solely or principally sending the bladed products to an address that is used for residential purposes. We have gone round in so solely for residential purposes. The noble Baroness many circles on this, but it seems to me that the raised the earlier example from the noble Lord, Lord amendment would be of reassurance to individual Paddick, of UPS, the delivery company. The noble craftspeople, to take just one group, who use a shed at Lord is right that there is no fool-proof way of establishing the back of their house or a room in the home for their whether a property is a genuine business address. business. However, we are creating in Clause 17 a new offence for Amendment 43B is a drafting point, and not a very the seller, and in Clause 18(1) we set out the defences good one. I am afraid that Amendment 43C would to that offence. Wehope that these together will motivate create a double negative, but, again, it deals with the the seller to take “all reasonable precautions”in verifying owner or occupier who resides in the premises. It the address, although we acknowledge that there is no probes whether the premises can be residential for fool-proof way of doing that. somebody other than the resident carrying on a business There are various ways that a seller could ascertain in it, even if the residential area is only a small part of whether a premises is used as a business. The buyer the whole of the premises. could provide evidence that the house was registered I have been trying to apply the terminology of the for business purposes or they could provide confirmation clause to what one knows goes on in all sorts of in writing of the business entity and confirmation that different types of premises, because we are causing— the business is run from home. In many cases the seller certainly for me—a good deal of confusion. As I have will also have a relationship with the buyer as a said before, one wants to get it right, and, as my noble business, possibly having supplied them with bladed friend and the noble Lord, Lord Kennedy, said, we are products over many years. I hope this provides the trying to make this Bill workable and fair. I beg to clarity sought on these provisions and that the noble move. Baroness will withdraw her amendments.

5.15 pm The Duke of Montrose: Again, going back to my Baroness Barran (Con): My Lords, I am grateful to problem of sheep-clippers, or itinerant workers, do the the noble Baroness for explaining these amendments. business premises being delivered to have to be in the I do not think we are far apart in what we want to name of the person carrying out the business? If you achieve in relation to deliveries to residential premises. happen to land with somebody who is running a I hope that I will be able to clarify our intentions and business, could you have something delivered there? assuage any concerns that might remain. Clause 17 makes it an offence for a remote seller of Baroness Barran: There is no restriction on delivering bladed products to send them to residential premises to a business premises. or a locker. When developing the offence, we were keen to ensure that it did not apply to the delivery of Baroness Hamwee: My Lords, the Official Report products to residential premises from which a business has already recorded my response, as noted by the was run—the noble Baroness gave the example of a noble Baroness. GC 287 Offensive Weapons Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 288

I think we will all want to spend some time after of the case for replacing custodial sentences of up to this stage of the Bill looking at the various provisions six months with community sentences for the knife-related that together make up what can and cannot be done. I offences in the Bill. As we have already discussed in would add to the mix the point raised on Monday Committee, we all know that the impact of knife crime which arises under Clause 18—it is not only my noble on society is devastating. Youngpeople getting hold of friend’s campaign about offences and defences—about knives by using remote sales can have tragic consequences the terms “all reasonable precautions” and “all due if they go on to use the weapon for a crime. The diligence” and how “all” applies in this situation. I possession of prohibited weapons is and should be a want to spend quite a lot of time understanding what serious offence.The Government believe it is proportionate we have been told, how it is reflected in the Bill and and fair that those committing these offences should what we should pursue at the next stage. I beg leave to expect robust sentences. withdraw the amendment. The noble Baroness will recall that I explained on Monday that community sentences cannot be set as Amendment 43A withdrawn. a maximum penalty for an offence as, under the Amendments 43B and 43C not moved. Criminal Justice Act 2003, community sentences are available only for offences which are imprisonable. In providing this maximum custodial penalty, we are Amendment 43D providing the courts with a range of penalties. This Moved by Baroness Hamwee gives courts the option to impose a custodial sentence, a community sentence, and/or a fine as they deem 43D: Clause 17, page 18, line 2, leave out “imprisonment for a term not exceeding 51 weeks” and insert “a community sentence” appropriate, having regard to all the circumstances of the offence and the offender. I know that the noble Member’s explanatory statement Lord, Lord Kennedy, welcomes this flexibility and the This amendment, and the other to page 18, line 5, would replace the short-term custodial sentences in Clause 17 with range of sentencing options which we considered earlier community sentences. in the week. As I mentioned on Monday, there is also the Baroness Hamwee: I shall speak also to requirement under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 that the Amendments 43E, 63A, 63B, 64A, 65A, 65B, 65C, court has to be satisfied that the offence is so serious 65D, 65E and 65F. This takes us back to community that only a custodial sentence can be justified. I therefore sentences. We debated their value and the problems remain confident that the courts will sentence offenders associated with short custodial sentences extensively appropriately, taking into account the circumstances on Monday. I do not want to rerun all the same points of the offence and the offender. Where a custodial today on Clauses 17, 22, 23 and 24, although I have sentence is justified, they will impose it, but where a noticed that Clause 23 brings in the possibility of an community order would be better for punishment and indictment where the term would be much longer. To rehabilitation, while protecting the public, then nothing the extent that that is relevant to this discussion, it in our provisions prevents that. strengthens my view that seriousness can be reflected The noble and learned Lord, Lord Judge, is not in by the prosecution being sent up to the Crown Court. his place, but he said on Monday that, The Minister directed the Committee to Section 150A “some short sentences do some good because they punish the of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 reminding us—or in offender”.—[Official Report, 28/1/19; col. GC 169.] my case, informing me—that a community sentence I wholeheartedly agree with that sentiment, and we can be imposed only if the offence might attract a should not now be depriving the courts of the full range custodial sentence. I would say that was game and of sentencing options. set—or some other sporting analogy—but I am not sure it is quite yet match, at least not until I am convinced The noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, asked whether that this is a good way of going about sentencing as the provisions of the Criminal Justice Act she referred there is a much wider issue behind this. to are in force. I will have to write to her on that specific question, if she is amenable to that. On that note, Section 150A does not apply if Section 151(2), which I ask that she withdraw the amendment. confers power to make a community order, does apply. Section 151 is about community orders for persistent offenders previously fined. Am I right in thinking that Baroness Hamwee: I would expect the Minister to this is not yet in force? Has it been shelved? Is there an answer no less. She started by saying that I would not intention to review it? More widely, does the Minister be surprised by the Government’s response, and she accept that, given the potential value of community will not be surprised to hear that we are not persuaded orders, the generally acknowledged problems with short either. custodial sentences and the state of our prisons, it I accepted what she said about Section 150, which is would be a good move to review Section 150A as she why I looked it up and spent the usual frustrating few explained it on Monday? I beg to move. minutes trying to work out whether something that applied to it was in force or not. I think it is not, which Baroness Williams of Trafford: My Lords, this group is why I took the opportunity to ask the question. My of amendments echoes one of our debates on Monday; overall question is whether it would be a good move to namely, whether it is appropriate to provide for custodial review Section 150A and bring that part of our attitude penalties of less than six months’ duration for certain to sentencing up to date. But we clearly cannot pursue new offences in the Bill. It will not come as a surprise this any further today and I beg leave to withdraw the to the noble Baroness to learn that I remain unpersuaded amendment. I will, however, ask the Minister to accept GC 289 Offensive Weapons Bill [LORDS] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 290

[BARONESS HAMWEE] Baroness Williams of Trafford: My Lords, I am that I have fulfilled my undertaking to be very quick—the grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, for clock had not even reached one minute by the time I setting out the amendment in the name of her noble had finished. friend Lord Paddick. As we have seen from earlier debates, these are complicated provisions but unavoidably Amendment 43D withdrawn. so, I am afraid. She wants to know two things: first, how the buyer can know what purpose the bladed Amendment 43E not moved. product will be used for and, secondly, why the provision relating to the adaptation under Clause 18(3) differs from Clause 17 agreed. that for design and manufacture under Clause 18(2). I hope to be able to provide some clarity but perhaps I may first summarise what we are talking about. Clause 18: Defences to offence under section 17 The defences at subsections (2) and (3) of Clause 18 Amendment 43F not moved. are aimed at allowing the dispatch of bespoke, handmade knives to a person’s home address. One issue that came 5.30 pm out clearly from the consultation is that there is a significant number of makers of handmade knives. These are often individual tradespersons who make Amendment 43G specialist knives for individual buyers.The most commonly Moved by Baroness Hamwee cited example, which the noble Baroness gave today, is 43G: Clause 18, page 18, line 21, leave out from “buyer” to end chef’sknives, which are made or adapted to specifications of line 23 provided by the chef—for example, on the length or Member’s explanatory statement shape of the blade, or the weight of the handle. Such The purpose of this amendment is to seek clarity as to how the handmade bespoke knives are very expensive and, in seller can necessarily know the purpose for which the buyer most cases, there is a relationship between the seller intends to use the knife; and why adaptations are not dealt with in and the buyer, which means there is no risk of these the same way as design. knives being sold to a young person. We therefore wanted to allow such knives to continue to be sent to Baroness Hamwee: My Lords, Clause 18 sets out the buyer’s home address. defences to an offence under the previous clause. One Clause 18(2) covers where a buyer asks a seller, who defence, in subsection (3), is if the person charged in such cases is also likely to be the manufacturer, to proves that, design or make specific knives to specifications that “the bladed product was adapted for the buyer before its delivery they have provided. This would cover where a chef, for in accordance with”, example, asks the seller to make them a set of knives the buyer’s specifications and that, to very specific specifications. The seller in these cases “the adaptations were made to enable or facilitate the use of the will often have a relationship with the buyer and it product by the buyer or its use for a particular purpose”. should be easy for the seller to prove that they are My amendment would take out the latter part of that making the knife to specifications, because they will provision. have correspondence with the buyer setting out the I wrote down “designer knife” as a heading for my requirements. notes and then thought that it has a very different and Clause 18(3) covers where the buyer wants an existing much more sinister connotation than referring to a knife adapted to meet specific specifications—for example, chef’s knife, which is the sort of thing that I understand where a chef wants a blade shortened or changed in this provision is aimed not to block, especially when shape or where they want the handle changed, or we talk about adaptations in the context of designer where a disabled person wants changes to a knife so knives. No doubt the proof— there has to be proof that they can use it—and these changes are to enable here—would in the event be a matter for the jury. But the knife to be used for a particular purpose, such as in view of the wording I referred to a few moments catering, outdoor pursuits or other activities. Again, ago about the defence of taking all reasonable precautions in these cases the seller will often have a relationship and exercising all due diligence, it is important that with the buyer and they will easily be able to evidence the person who may commit an offence knows what that the bladed product was adapted in accordance precautions to take. with specifications of the buyer and the purpose for Proof that the product was designed in accordance which it was going to be used, because this would be with specifications that the buyer provided seems likely part of the conversation or communication on which to be easier. They would be unlikely to make an order adaptations to make. For example, the maker would which does not set out the specifications but that may know that the knife was needed for gutting fish—that not be the same with adaptations, because they might issue was raised the other day—or because the buyer have a conversation on the phone about their requirements. had one hand and needed it for sawing branches, as I want to pursue that issue, and why the activities that would be part of the decision on what changes which amount to the defence are to be undertaken needed to be made. The purpose of Clause 18(3)(b) is “before its delivery” when those words are not in to exclude the etching of a person’s name on a bladed Clause 18(2). I do not see the distinction there nor the product, as we did not want to provide a defence for distinction between the two subsections, given the bladed products where the only adaptation to the product words “for a particular purpose”. How does the person was the engraving of words on, or similar superficial who may be charged know the purpose? I beg to move. adaptation to, the product. GC 291 Offensive Weapons Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 292

I hope that, in light of that explanation, the noble delivering a bladed article to persons under 18. I thought Baroness will be content to withdraw the amendment. the whole point—no pun intended—of banning delivery to residential premises was to prevent under-18s getting Baroness Hamwee: My Lords, the Minister’s last their hands on it. Why does it need to be a bladed point about engraving a name had not occurred to me, article in one part and a bladed product in another? although I do not quite see how it is distinct from the In relation to Amendment 45, I agree with the situation under subsection (2), where you might ask noble Lord and would go further. In the course of my for a product to be manufactured with the specification duties as a police officer, I have seen daggers with very of adding your name. I will go through what the sharp points, but with blades not necessarily sharp Minister said, but for the moment, at any rate, I beg enough to cut—the dagger is specifically designed to leave to withdraw the amendment. stab people, but is not capable of cutting. It would be exempt from the definition as written in the Bill. I am Amendment 43G withdrawn. not sure whether it is necessary to list examples of what are and are not bladed products, but we certainly Clause 18 agreed. need a much better idea of what we are trying to do here. Clause 19: Meaning of “bladed product” in sections 17 and 18 Lord Kennedy of Southwark: I was not intending to come in on this item, but the more I sit here listening to this Bill, the more concerned and confused I get. I Amendment 44 support the intentions of the Government in trying to Moved by Lord Lucas deal with knife crime and violence—they are absolutely 44: Clause 19, page 19, line 7, leave out “and 18” and insert “, right there—but, listening to this, I am not convinced 18 and 20” we are on the right track. Member’s explanatory statement Is the Minister aware of the Better Regulation This amendment is intended to probe and clarify the definition Executive? It is part of BIS, or whatever the department and use of “bladed article” under Clause 20. is called now, and is in charge of regulatory reform across the British Government. Its policy is described Lord Lucas: My Lords, I will also speak to the in these terms: other amendments in this group.Most of the amendments “Some regulations are ineffective and unnecessary. Complying were tabled just to give me an opportunity to listen to with them costs businesses time and money, and can restrict the Minister on why the Bill contains two definitions economic growth … Governments generally attempt to ensure of bladed items: “bladed article”, which is the current regulations are fair and effective. The Better Regulation Executive’s purpose is to effectively strike the right balance between protecting definition in legislation, and “bladed product”, which people’s rights, health and safety and freeing them from unnecessary is introduced just for the purposes of Clauses 17 and bureaucracy”. 18. I would like to know the reason for the choice of If it has not gone there already, the Bill needs to go application and the need for two definitions. there straightaway. Clearly, there is a lot of mess in this On the definition in Clause 19, why does a pointed Bill. I say it should go there because we are affecting article appear to be excluded? If I was to wander lots of British businesses and putting them at a competitive about the streets wanting to do people harm, a sharpened disadvantage to other businesses in Europe and around knitting needle would be a pretty good thing to take the world. We need to get our businesses up and with me. It would be easy to shove through clothing working well, and I do not see how this is helping. and it has a nice little button on one end, so that it Maybe it has gone there already and been improved by does not go into me. Under the clause as drafted, it it. If it has not, I hope we can get the Bill off to it and appears to be exempt. Why is that? maybe get something back before Report. If we are going to use such a wide definition, we need to help people who are in the business of selling Lord Paddick: My Lords, would the noble Lord, products to understand that it has a wide application. Lord Kennedy, agree that perhaps his trusted traders As I read it, it would apply to a helicopter—not that scheme would also need to go through that process? many helicopters get delivered to residential premises—as a helicopter is a bladed article. It would also apply to Lord Kennedy of Southwark: I certainly would. I fans, if not to Mr Dyson’s fans, and it would apply to would be delighted for it to go through the process, lawnmowers and various other things that have blades. because the scheme I have been keen we talk about has It ought to be clear to people who have to obey this come not from me, but from the industry. They want law whether they will be caught by it. I do not object the scheme, so I would be delighted for it to go there, to how widely the Government draw it, but its extent since they are the people who make these niche products should be made clear, as it should in respect of which and are worried that the Government are putting them items people are likely to have to apply it. I beg to at a competitive disadvantage. move. The Earl of Listowel: My Lords, I wonder how the Lord Paddick: My Lords, I too look forward to the rest of the world deals with these issues. The Minister Government’s explanation of the difference between may have described that to us at some point. The “bladed product” and “bladed article”, and of why situation clearly seems to cry out for international there is a distinction between the offence of delivering co-operation if there are serious issues in other nations of a bladed product to residential premises and that of with knife crime and corrosive substances. For instance, GC 293 Offensive Weapons Bill [LORDS] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 294

[THE EARL OF LISTOWEL] Baroness Williams of Trafford: I hope that I will get what does Germany do with regard to these issues? some inspiration from behind me in the course of I know that recent circumstances here have changed what I am going to say. I started by saying that items very rapidly, so it may be an issue just in this country. such as stiletto knives or daggers are already caught by The United States probably has an even more significant the definition of “bladed product” in the Bill, because problem with it and may be more resistant to intervene they have a blade and are capable of cutting the skin. than we would be. There is, therefore, no need to add a further reference Knife crime is a symptom of many other things, to piercing the skin, which would be the effect of my including, as we were hearing yesterday, our issues noble friend’s amendment. I note that he has clarified around drugs. We heard from two police officers, one that his concern is to ensure that the definition covers a retired undercover drugs detective. He was saying “weapons such as stilettos”. I hope he will accept that that since the introduction of the Misuse of Drugs the definition in the Bill is already sufficient to capture (Amendment) Regulations 1988, we have seen a soaring stiletto knives. I do not think that he has in mind in the number of people using drugs. He pointed out stiletto heels—or does he? that 10% of users take up 50% of the supply of serious drugs; so 10% of chronic heroin users are consuming Lord Lucas: No. 50% of the drugs market. If one addressed the needs of these drug users, as Baroness Williams of Trafford: That is good. These we used to do before the misuse of drugs Acts—if we would not fall within the definition in the Bill as they provide users quickly with methadone and with safe do not generally have a blade. It is our intention places to take drugs—the demand would disappear that the definition of “bladed product” excludes those and the supply would shrink. These would perhaps be articles with a blade that are unlikely to cause serious more effective options. Maybe the Minister can write injury if used as a weapon. They might include cutlery, to us about what happens in other nations and how fans and lawnmowers—which he mentioned—among they deal with these issues. other things. We believe that it is unlikely that such items will be procured by persons under 18 to be used 5.45 pm as weapons. We also want to exclude articles that can cause serious injury only other than by cutting, for Baroness Williams of Trafford: My Lords, I thank instance when used as a blunt object. Ultimately, it my noble friend Lord Lucas for outlining his amendments. will up to the courts to determine whether an item is Amendments 45 and 46 are intended to bring weapons or has a blade and is capable of causing serious injury such as stilettos and—as he mentioned—knitting needles by way of cutting the skin. However, we will issue within the definition of “bladed product”. We have guidance in consultation with the police and business deliberately not defined the word “cutting” in the Bill. to provide further clarity on this and other provisions It will carry its normal meaning. The Oxford English in the Bill. Dictionary defines the verb “to cut” as, among other Perhaps I might add that Amendment 46 highlights things, to, the risk of including an indicative list of examples in “make an opening, incision, or wound in (something) with a legislation, which brings complications of its own. For sharp-edged tool or object”, example, one might ask why the list includes screwdrivers and to, but not chisels, or lawn mowers but not hedging shears “trim or reduce the length of (grass, hair, etc) by using a sharp and so forth. It is better, I suggest, to leave it to the implement”. police, prosecutors and the courts, supported by the The normal meaning is therefore capable of capturing guidance to which I have referred, to determine relevance a wide range of items with which cutting, in all its in the circumstances of each situation. ordinary meanings, can be done, including knives, This leads me to Amendments 44, 47, 55 and 56, scissors, axes, machetes and the like. It follows, therefore, which would change the types of articles to which that items such as stilettos, knives or daggers are Clause 20 applies from “bladed articles” to “bladed already caught by the definition of “bladed product” products”. My noble friend Lord Lucas has rightly in the Bill because they have a blade and are capable of asked why, in Clause 20, the term “bladed articles” is cutting the skin. used rather than “bladed products”. A bladed product is defined in Clause 19 as, Lord Lucas: My Lords, perhaps I may address that “an article which … is or has a blade, and … is capable of causing particular point in relation to Section 139 of the Criminal a serious injury to a person which involves cutting that person’s Justice Act 1988, which refers to, skin”. “any article which has a blade or is sharply pointed”. “Bladed article” is defined by Clause 20(11), in the Clearly the drafters of that clause felt the need to case of England and Wales, as an article, define “or … sharply pointed”. In other words, something “to which section 141A of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 applies”. that is sharply pointed does not have, and is not, a My noble friend referred to this. blade. It is essential that in Clause 19(1) the object we Section 141A applies to: any knife, except a folding are talking about is, or has, a blade, whereas Section 139 pocket knife with a blade of three inches or less; any clearly differentiates between an object that has a knife blade; any razor blade, except those permanently blade and an object that is sharply pointed. I do not enclosed in cartridges; any axe; and any other article see how we can have at the same time in legislation which has a blade or which is sharply pointed and one clause that says these two things are separate and which is made or adapted for use for causing injury to another which maintains that they are the same. the person. “Bladed article” therefore captures a wide GC 295 Offensive Weapons Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 296 range of articles with a blade from kitchen knives to Lord Lucas: I am very grateful to my noble friend cutlery knives, scissors, and so on. This is the language for that explanation. I shall read it with care in Hansard. used in the Criminal Justice Act 1988 in relation to the I expect, as with the previous amendment, that I might sales of knives and possession offences.“Bladed product” like to ask her to put the requirement for guidance in refers to a smaller set of items with a blade: those the legislation, because it is important that people which can cause serious injury by cutting the skin, as should know what the ambit of this legislation is. I defined in Clause 19. The effect of Amendments 44, thank her on behalf of vampire hunters everywhere 47, 55 and 56 would therefore be that the range of that they can have their wooden stakes safely delivered articles to which Clause 20 applies would be smaller to their houses without obstruction. I beg leave to than is currently the case in the Bill. withdraw the amendment. I hope that my noble friend is reassured by the provisions in Clauses 17 to 20. If a bladed article is Amendment 44 withdrawn. delivered on behalf of a seller based abroad, the delivery Amendments 45 to 47 not moved. company has the responsibility to ensure that the item is not handed over to a person aged under 18, whether the seller uses a marketplace platform or sells direct, Amendments 48 to 53 or whether the item is delivered to a private address or Moved by Baroness Williams of Trafford a collection point. As I said earlier, we cannot enforce 48: Clause 19, page 19, line 15, leave out from beginning legislation against a seller who is based abroad but, in to “or” this instance, we have the ability to place the onus on Member’s explanatory statement the person who delivers the merchandise here to ensure This amendment and the Minister’s amendments at page 19, that they do not deliver a bladed article into the hands lines 16, 21, 22, 30 and 31 would modify the offences relating to delivery of a bladed product in Clause 17. Currently these offences of a person aged under 18. do not apply to weapons to which section 141 of the Criminal The noble Lord, Lord Kennedy, asked about the Justice Act 1988 applies and the amendments would remove that business impact. I concur with him that we should be exception. concerned about the impact on British businesses. We 49: Clause 19, page 19, line 16, leave out “that Act” and insert have published an impact assessment alongside the “the Criminal Justice Act 1988” Bill, which can be found on the Bill’s page on GOV.UK. Member’s explanatory statement See the explanation of the Minister’s amendment at page 19, Lord Kennedy of Southwark: So would this not have line 15. gone to the Better Regulation Executive to look at? 50: Clause 19, page 19, line 21, leave out paragraph (b) Member’s explanatory statement Baroness Williams of Trafford: In terms of better See the explanation of the Minister’s amendment at page 19, regulation, I do not think that it has but I will double-check line 15. before Report. It probably has not. 51: Clause 19, page 19, line 22, leave out “that Act” and insert “the Criminal Justice Act 1988” The noble Earl, Lord Listowel, asked about the Member’s explanatory statement position in other countries and the approach we have See the explanation of the Minister’s amendment at page 19, taken. Of course we always learn from other jurisdictions, line 15. and I hope that they learn from us, but we must 52: Clause 19, page 19, line 30, leave out from beginning legislate as we consider it appropriate to address the to “or” position as we find it in this country. Regarding the Member’s explanatory statement problems underlying drug addiction, we will come on See the explanation of the Minister’s amendment at page 19, to that when we reach Amendment 63 in the name of line 15. the noble Baroness, Lady Meacher, who I do not think 53: Clause 19, page 19, line 31, leave out “the Criminal Justice is in her place at this point. (Northern Ireland) Order 1996” and insert “that Order” I want to make one final point about articles with a Member’s explanatory statement blade or point: we do not want to capture items such See the explanation of the Minister’s amendment at page 19, as screwdrivers and crochet needles because they are line 15. not usually used for harm—that is not to say they are not used for harm, but not usually. Hence we are Amendments 48 to 53 agreed. referring to “blade” and not “sharp point”. I hope that, Clause 19 agreed. with those explanations, the noble Lord will withdraw his amendment. Amendment 54 not moved. Baroness Hamwee: Before we get to that point, the Minister has mentioned guidance, which will certainly Clause 20: Delivery of bladed articles to persons be very welcome. Can we be assured that the under 18 practitioners—I do not mean those with real knives, Amendments 55 to 57 not moved. but those in the criminal justice sector, prosecution, the Bar Council, police and so on—are consulted about how the guidance is presented? I can see a nod Amendment 57A at that. That will be very helpful. Moved by Baroness Hamwee I cannot help observing that whoever gave the 57A: Clause 20, page 20, line 7, leave out subsection (3) Minister the note about crochet needles is not someone Member’s explanatory statement who uses them, because they have a curved end. This amendment is to probe why this exemption exists. GC 297 Offensive Weapons Bill [LORDS] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 298

Baroness Hamwee: My Lords, I did not move the sale of ordinary kitchen knives and such things. It Amendment 55A because there was an equivalent that is just too difficult. They will drop all sorts of other we debated on Monday. Amendment 57A would have household products if they think they might fall under had an equivalent amendment, but I missed it—nobody the Act. It will just cause great inconvenience for UK is perfect. However, this allows us to return yet again households. to the distinction between sellers outside the UK and sellers carrying on the, Baroness Williams of Trafford: I thank the noble “business of selling articles of any kind from premises in any part Baroness for outlining her amendment. I understand of the United Kingdom”, that its purpose is to probe the meaning of Clause 20(3). at the time of the sale. Obviously, we will have a discussion before Report I was curious about that distinction, and have one and I am happy to discuss the unwillingness of companies, or two points I would like to check. Am I right to but I go back to the first group of amendments, where think that “carrying on business” does not mean that I outlined the failing in the system of test purchases. the business has to be based or domiciled to fulfil that Clause 20(3) sets out when a seller, other than an description? I assume that the seller does not have to individual seller, is to be regarded as outside the UK. have his own premises and can operate, for instance, Where an overseas seller is an individual, it is relatively from a contractor’s premises; and that the description easy to establish that they are based overseas, but “selling articles of any kind” will be met if the seller where a seller is a company it might not be so obvious sells teddy bears, for instance, rather than knives from where they are based. For example, the company within the UK. might operate mainly from China, where its headquarters are based, but might also have offices and shops in 6 pm the UK. On a wider point, the Minister has confirmed that The provision is constructed so that a company one can buy corrosives and have them delivered to selling bladed articles is considered to be based outside residential premises if they are bought from a seller the UK only when the business is not conducted overseas but not if they are ordered from a UK seller. from premises in any part of the UK—that is, where The succinct description of that from the noble Lord, the company is based solely overseas and does not sell Lord Lucas, was: articles in this country. If the seller conducts the “That seems a bit odd”. business in any part of the UK, it would be subject My noble friend Lord Paddick talked, as he has done to the provisions in Clause 17 and prohibited from since, about how this fits with age verification, saying dispatching bladed articles to a residential premises or on Monday: locker. I hope that that explanation helps the noble “Clause 4 says that if the courier knows it is a corrosive Baroness. substance”— for that, one can read bladed products or articles— Lord Lucas: My Lords, I hear what the Minister “they have to take these precautions … It makes no sense to me at says, but this would not cover Amazon, because at the all. If age verification at the point of handover is effective in moment the selling is done from abroad. preventing under-18 year-olds getting hold of substances in the case of overseas sellers, why cannot age verification at the point of Baroness Williams of Trafford: I do not agree with handover be effective in preventing them getting hold of corrosive the noble Lord on that point. substances delivered to residential premises from a UK supplier? It seems to make absolutely no sense whatever”. Lord Lucas: Well, my Lords, perhaps we could enter I read that because I wanted to check the Minister’s into some correspondence about that. What Amazon response, which was: does in this country is the fulfilment; the selling is “I think it is because there is an unwillingness to do that with UK done from Ireland or Liechtenstein, but certainly not sales”.—[Official Report, 28/1/19; cols. GC 185-6.] from within this country. We need to be clear that The Committee has indicated that it does not feel this these activities can get split, particularly in the case of to be a satisfactory situation. Can the Minister say big companies. The whole action of selling the knife, anything more about the unwillingness to create extra preparing it for delivery and delivering it is what provisions that UK sellers, as distinct from overseas should be considered as selling it, not just the technical sellers, would have to meet? Is that what underlies this? act of selling. She has offered a discussion before Report. I want to put that on the agenda, but she might be able to say Baroness Hamwee: My Lords, that is why I asked a little more about it in this public session. I beg to some of my questions, as the activities can be split— move. although I do not want to promote Amazon. These issues may not be far from the taxation points that The Earl of Erroll (CB): My Lords, I am sorry to arise in connection with some of these organisations. have missed a bit; the Committee may have dealt with As it happens, I do not quite agree with the noble Lord this.On overseas and online sales,on Monday I mentioned about who is selling. Last night, I looked up an item Amazon. I have confirmed that Amazon is an that I have only been able to find to buy through international seller. It is headquartered in Ireland and Amazon and the website said, “This is dispatched from qualifies as such, but the delivery mechanism is within and sold by”somebody else. However, a lot of questions the UK. Apparently, that is a clear ruling from elsewhere remain. so there is a big problem, as the noble Baroness has just said. I was also told, because I was chairing a Lord Lucas: That is an Amazon Marketplace thing meeting on the subject, that retailers are now dropping and not an Amazon own product. GC 299 Offensive Weapons Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 300

Lord Deben (Con): I was here at our last meeting, (b) they are displays for the purpose of that trade, and when this issue was discussed. It has obviously caused (c) the display is accessible only to persons who are us a great deal of misunderstanding and we have engaged in, or employed by, a business which is also found it quite difficult to undo. I am concerned about part of that trade. the customers; I am not sure that they would understand (5) No offence is committed under this section if the display it at all. Therefore, I hope that the Minister will agree is a requested display to an individual aged 18 or over. to try to work this out in a way that the public can (6) The appropriate Minister may provide in regulations that understand. Part of what we are trying to do is to no offence is committed under subsection (1) if the make suitable controls. I was not able to be here display complies with requirements specified in regulations.” earlier, but I have been here for this discussion. Even Member’s explanatory statement so, I am in the same position as I was when we talked This new Clause would prohibit the open display of bladed about this before: I do not understand it wholly and I products in shops. am not sure that the noble Baroness does, although she is very clever and often understands things when Lord Tunnicliffe: My Lords, this amendment in the I do not. Clearly, we do not understand it, so is it name of my noble friend seeks to insert a new clause possible for us to look at it again? If it means that it is after Clause 20 to prohibit the display of bladed better to be a seller from abroad than to be a seller at products in shops.The honourable Member for Lewisham home, frankly I would not like to have to explain that Deptford, Vicky Foxcroft, the chair of the Youth on a platform to the public. I would find that difficult. Violence Commission, has done some excellent work In the end, we ought not to help people who are on this matter. Members from all sides in the other domiciled abroad in order to avoid paying taxes and place, along with academics, practitioners, youth service who undermine people who are here paying taxes. I workers, the police and experts connected with youth am not terribly keen on that and, again, I would not violence have been very involved in the work of the like to explain it on a platform. I always think this commission. I commend the commission’s report, which about the small “p” political things: if I were standing was recently published—it should be read by all noble on a platform and someone asked me the question, Lords. One of its important recommendations is could I give them an answer that would not mean that the prohibition of knife displays in shops. During the hall threw rotten apples? I am afraid that this is consideration in the other place, USDAW—the Union rotten-apple time. of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers—was asked whether it believed that putting knives behind displays Baroness Hamwee: My Lords, I am grateful for would be helpful. Doug Russell, representing USDAW, that. I do not think that I would manage even to get as said: far as the rotten apples, because I would have bored “It would be. Obviously, now big retailers are increasingly going down the route of making it more difficult for customers to the audience. It is not just the buyer who needs to be get their hand on the product until they have been age-checked”,— clear about this; it is the seller and everybody in the [Official Report, Commons, Offensive Weapons Bill Committee, chain. There needs to be more clarity than I have 19/7/18; col. 98.] obtained and I look forward to the meeting when we and they have assured themselves that a transaction is will discuss this further. I beg leave to withdraw the safe. I want people’s ages to be checked properly when amendment. they seek to purchase knives. We must also protect against the theft of knives. Amendment 57A withdrawn. There are several restrictions in law relating to other products, most obviously the extremely restrictive Amendments 57B and 57C not moved. provisions for the sale of tobacco, which prohibit the display of tobacco products in relevant shops and Clause 20 agreed. businesses in England. The Tobacco Advertising and Promotion Act 2002 refers specifically to under-18s, so the principle already exists in law to protect under-18s Amendment 58 from harm by prohibiting the open display of goods. Moved by Lord Tunnicliffe I see no reason why this should not be extended to 58: After Clause 20, insert the following new Clause— bladed products. I beg to move. “Prohibition of bladed product displays (1) A person who in the course of a business displays a Lord Paddick: My Lords, if I understand this bladed product in a place in England and Wales or amendment correctly, I do not feel I can support it. Northern Ireland is guilty of an offence. Clearly bladed products should be displayed in a way (2) The appropriate Minister may by regulations provide for that ensures they are safe and cannot easily be stolen, the meaning of “place” in this section. but I cannot agree with the suggestion that they need (3) The appropriate Minister may by regulations make provision to be hidden in case they lead people into being for a display in a place which also amounts to an tempted to use them for criminal purposes, if that is advertisement to be treated for the purposes of offences in what the noble Lord is saying. The noble Lord mentioned England and Wales or Northern Ireland under this Act— cigarettes.They are now hidden from view and advertising (a) as an advertisement and not as a display, or them has been banned because they are always and in (b) as a display and not as an advertisement. every circumstance bad for your health and addictive, (4) No offence is committed under this section if— but the same cannot be said for knives. We do not (a) the bladed products are displayed in the course of a conceal alcohol or glue as they have legitimate uses, business which is part of the bladed product trade, and we do not believe it is necessary to conceal knives. GC 301 Offensive Weapons Bill [LORDS] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 302

Baroness Barran: As the noble Lord, Lord Tunnicliffe, We will also use the framework of the Primary has explained, this amendment would make it a Authority scheme, which we may come on to in the criminal offence for a businessperson to display a next group, to consolidate consistent best practice bladed product. The amendment seeks to replicate for across business. Government Amendment 82 would knives the legislation in place on the display of tobacco expand the scheme to the sale of knives and corrosive products. substances. As the noble Lord, Lord Paddick, has just pointed I hope I have been able to persuade the noble Lord out, the prohibition on the display of tobacco products of the Government’s commitment to ensure that bladed is to help reduce the major risk to public health that products are displayed securely, and therefore he will comes from smoking: it is to help reduce smoking be content to withdraw his amendment. uptake by those under 18 and to support adult smokers who want to quit by removing temptation from open Lord Tunnicliffe: I thank the Minister for her response. display. We do not want to stop people buying knives, I felt that it was more persuasive in favour of the only to stop their sale to under-18s. Requiring businesses amendment than my own words, but I cannot agree to remove all bladed products from open display and with the conclusions she came to. Sadly, given the to have them hidden away could have significant cost widespread support for the amendment, I beg leave to implications in terms of staff to operate the secure withdraw it. displays and for fixtures and the layout of stores. Our Amendment 58 withdrawn. estimate shows that the cost to business of a requirement to lock bladed products into cabinets would be very significant. The Government believe a legal requirement Amendment 59 not to display knives for all sellers, regardless of whether Moved by Lord Tunnicliffe knife crime is a problem in the area where the business 59: After Clause 20, insert the following Clause— is placed, is not a proportionate measure. We believe “Enforcement of sections 1, 3, 4, 17 and 20 that voluntary action on a risk-based basis will achieve (1) It shall be the duty of every authority to which subsection the same aim. (4) applies to enforce within its area the provisions of The Home Office voluntary agreement with retailers sections 1, 3, 4, 17 and 20 of this Act. including Wilko, Morrisons, Tesco and Argos includes (2) An authority in England or Wales to which subsection an agreement that retailers will ensure knives are displayed (4) applies shall have the power to investigate and prosecute and packed securely as appropriate to minimise risk. an alleged contravention of any provision under sections 1, This includes retailers taking practical and proportionate 3, 4, 17 and 20 of this Act which was committed outside its area in any part of England and Wales. action to restrict accessibility,avoid immediate use, reduce the possibility of injury and prevent theft. Retailers (3) A district council in Northern Ireland shall have the power to investigate and prosecute an alleged contravention are also looking at more technology-based measures of any provision under sections 1, 3, 4, 17 and 20 of this to prevent theft and to ensure that age verification takes Act which was committed outside its area in any part of place consistently in every case. For instance, retailers Northern Ireland. tell us that the use of tagging and more advanced (4) The authorities to which this section applies are— bar-coding have proven to be an active deterrent in (a) in England, a county council, metropolitan borough relation to both theft and age verification. council, unitary authority, district council or London Borough Council, the Common Council of the City of London in its capacity as a local authority and 6.15 pm the Council of the Isles of Scilly; However, the Government want much stronger (b) in Wales, a county council or a county borough voluntary action in relation to displays, and we are council; working with retailers, the police and trading standards (c) in Scotland, a council constituted under section 2 of to promote good practice. We are encouraging an the Local Government etc. (Scotland) Act 1994; approach where the police work with retailers to advise (d) in Northern Ireland, any district council. on the use of locks or tags, or cabinets in stores located (5) In enforcing any provision under sections 1, 3, 4, 17 and in knife crime hotspot areas. Some police forces have 20 of this Act, an authority must act in a manner already been working with retailers to identify risks proportionate to the seriousness of the risk and shall and stores that are more likely to be targeted by young take due account of the precautionary principle, and people wanting to get their hands on knives. shall encourage and promote voluntary action by The noble Earl, Lord Erroll, mentioned his concern producers and distributors. about normal retailers finding it too tiresome to stock (6) Notwithstanding subsection (5), an authority may take knives. The evidence we have is that those limitations any action under this section urgently and without first encouraging and promoting voluntary action if a on displays apply in high-priority areas. For example, product poses a serious risk.” Morrisons has decided not to display kitchen knives in Member’s explanatory statement its stores in areas which, in consultation with the This new Clause, for the relevant authorities, would create (a) police, have been identified as high priority. Similarly, a duty for them to enforce the relevant sections of this Bill, and Poundland has removed kitchen knives from sale across (b) a power for them to investigate alleged offences under this Bill. the UK as a result of its commitment to the Home Office voluntary agreement on the sale of knives, and Lord Tunnicliffe: Amendments 59, 60 and 86 in this has stopped selling kitchen knives in its stores. The group, which are tabled in my name, seek to give actions taken by these retailers illustrate how working trading standards powers to enforce the relevant provisions closely with them on a risk-based approach produces of the Bill and a power to investigate alleged breaches positive results. of the relevant provisions contained in the Bill. There are GC 303 Offensive Weapons Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 304 excellent examples of good work already going on, are less likely to provide the resources to deal with a which this amendment seeks to build on. Croydon problem, let alone with the training and recruitment Borough Council has worked with local retailers to of staff. The issue of resources is huge, and it is the improve their understanding of the law around knife elephant in the room in this context. We are all aware sales through training and to encourage them to go of the constraints on local authorities. It is a while further than required by law through responsible retail since I was a local councillor, and I used to think that agreements and has caught traders willing to break we had problems then. I do not know how local the law on underage sales by using test purchasers in authorities manage now to juggle the calls on their person and online. Croydon trading standards now resources, so I must make that obvious point as well as has 145 retailers signed up to its responsible retailer asking these few questions. It is right that the role of agreements. It ran eight “Do you pass?”training sessions trading standards is recognised here, as is their role with with retailers over the past year, encouraging additional offensive weapons as a whole, given their understanding measures, such as Challenge 25 and the responsible of how the communities where they work actually display of knives in stores. The training sessions are a operate. good indicator of which retailers are keen to work responsibly and which might not be. Finally, 61 test Lord Harris of Haringey: My Lords, I apologise purchases of knives have been carried out in the past for missing the first few words of my noble friend’s year to identify those retailers which are not complying introductory remarks on this amendment. I echo what with the law. We have also seen excellent work done in the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, said because I this regard by the police in Greenwich through test wonder whether the wording in the government purchases by cadets. amendment is as precise as it is intended to be. The These additional responsibilities will create a resource Chartered Trading Standards Institute—I refer to my issue as this will be an additional power and an interests in terms of trading standards—says that a additional requirement, but one that I think is needed. correct definition, if you mean just weights and measures I recognise that the Serious Violence Strategy released authorities, would be, by the Home Office contained the promise of a “a local weights and measures authority”, prosecution fund for trading standards for two years in Great Britain, to support targeted prosecution activity against online “within the meaning set out in section 69 of the Weights and and instore retailers in breach of the law on the sale of Measures Act 1985”. knives to underage people. The strategy is not clear The Department for the Economy in Northern Ireland about how much funding will be made available and may enforce within its area, rather than simply talking gives no clarity to trading standards about support in those terms. I wonder whether a broader definition two years down the line. Perhaps the Minister can would not make sense, given that in many local authorities update the Grand Committee on this. now the trading standards function, which is so In putting these amendments forward, I am aware diminished, is often spread with other responsibilities. that the budget for trading standards has been cut by That may be something the Government want to take half since 2010, from more than £200 million to barely away and look at to make sure that what they are £100 million, while the number of trading standards trying to achieve meets the obligation. officers has fallen by 56% in the same period. The cuts The second point about whether this should be I refer to have led to the downgrading of the protections made a duty is important as well. People I know very that consumers depend on. In many cases, they have well in the Chartered Trading Standards Institute try been reduced to a system based on consumer complaints. to get this both ways: they complain constantly about Relying on such a system is not an effective way to all the statutory duties placed on local authorities, and enforce laws, particularly when we talk about the purchase therefore the inability of local authorities to take them of knives or corrosive substances. I hope to get a seriously, but they also say, “Here is something which positive response and that the Minister will speak to ought to be a statutory duty”. The psychological effect her amendments in this group. I beg to move. of making it clear that the Government wish to place a responsibility on local authorities to pursue their role Baroness Hamwee: My Lords, I am not sure whether in this matter would be extremely helpful and valuable. the Minister wants to introduce the government’s If the Government were to find some way of making amendments now, so perhaps I should just ask some the resources available, so that, rather than just placing questions. At Second Reading, I raised the role of trading the duty, they could also ensure that local authorities standards so it is obviously welcome that it is being had the wherewithal to take effective action, that would addressed. be extremely helpful. There are some obvious questions about the Government’s amendments. First, why weights and Baroness Barran: My Lords, the amendments in measures authorities? I confess that I have not looked this group are directed at a common end—namely, to up the statutory definition of a weights and measures support the effective enforcement of the provisions of authority, but there must be one. Why is it that rather the Bill by local authorities. Amendment 59 introduces than local authorities? The Chartered Trading Standards a legal duty on local authorities to enforce the legislation Institute makes the point that if the obligation was in relation to the sale and delivery of bladed articles placed on local authorities as a whole, they might have and corrosive substances. more flexibility in how they dealt with the issue. Secondly, Local authorities in England and Wales already why is it not a statutory duty? On that point, the regulate the sale of bladed articles using general powers institute says that, in its experience, local authorities in Section 222 of the Local Government Act 1972. GC 305 Offensive Weapons Bill [LORDS] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 306

[BARONESS BARRAN] Baroness Hamwee: When that is done, could examples Under that section, where a local authority considers —not a whole list of the grain to which the Minister it expedient for the promotion or protection of the refers—be given to us? interests of the inhabitants of its area, it may prosecute, defend or appear in legal proceedings and, in the case Baroness Barran: We will gladly do that. of civil proceedings, may institute them in its own name. The noble Lord, Lord Tunnicliffe, asked for more There is no reason why local authorities could not detail about the prosecution fund that was announced use the general powers under the Local Government in the Government’s Serious Violence Strategy. The Act 1972 to enforce the provisions in the Bill in relation Government committed £500,000 in 2018-19 and another to the sale of corrosive products. It is also possible for £500,000 in 2019-20 to support local authorities to the legislation in relation to sales of bladed articles bring prosecutions, where appropriate, in relation to and corrosive products to be enforced by the police. age-restricted sales of knives. The prosecution fund is Consistent with these existing powers, the Government managed by National Trading Standards, which is the do not believe that it is necessary to impose a duty on body that brings together trading standards representatives local authorities to enforce the legislation in relation in England and Wales. The fund will be used by to the sale of bladed articles and corrosive products. 11 local areas identified as having a knife crime problem That is not to say that local authorities’ enforcement to test compliance with sale of knives legislation. I powers in this area cannot be strengthened. This leads think the noble Lord will be pleased to hear that me to Amendment 60, which seeks to extend the Croydon is among the 11 areas since he referred to the application of the investigative powers provided for in good work that is going on there. the Consumer Rights Act 2015. These powers enable Amendment 86 would enable local authorities and local authorities to: require information from sellers; companies to establish partnerships with the purpose observe the carrying on of business; enter premises of complying with the provisions in the Bill. The noble without warrant; inspect products; test equipment; Lord will correct me if I am wrong, but I suspect that require the production of documents; or seize and detain this amendment is aimed at extending the benefits of goods. the primary authority scheme. The primary authority scheme was created in response to recommendations 6.30 pm in the Hampton report published in 2005, which noted I agree with the noble Lord that extending the widespread inconsistencies of regulatory interpretation powers under the 2015 Act to the sale of corrosives between different local authorities. It was introduced and knives would enhance the ability of local authorities in April 2009. The Enterprise Act 2016 included measures to enforce the legislation in these regulatory areas. to amend the Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Government Amendment 81 covers similar ground to Act 2008 to enable many more small businesses and the noble Lord’s Amendment 60. Given that local pre-start-up enterprises to participate in primary authority. authorities have used the general powers under the The primary authority scheme provides greater Local Government Act 1972 to enforce provisions regulatory consistency for businesses operating across similar to those in the Bill, we see no need to create a a number of local authority areas. This is expected to duty, although we are well aware of the concerns of improve compliance with the legislation. The scheme the Chartered Trading Standards Institute in this regard. is based on the creation of a statutory partnership We agree with the noble Lord that it is important that between a business and its primary authority. The local authorities are given the investigatory powers primary authority acts as a key point of contact for a they need. business that it partners with, in relation to the business’s The noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, asked about interaction with local authorities that regulate it, known the use of local weights and measures authorities. This as enforcing authorities. The primary authority acts as approach goes with the grain— co-ordinator of other local authority inspections of that business. The primary authority supports businesses Lord Tunnicliffe: I am very slow today. The Minister in meeting their obligations by helping them to understand has spent a lot of time agreeing with me and then she what needs to be done to achieve or maintain compliance: has not suggested that we should adopt the amendment. setting out a way of doing so, or providing information Is she suggesting that we should adopt the amendment that the method of compliance chosen by the business or is she trying to persuade me that it is not necessary? is acceptable. For the benefit of noble Lords, I will mention that all the major supermarkets, Amazon and the Association of Convenience Stores—given that Baroness Barran: I am trying to persuade the noble your Lordships have mentioned the importance of Lord that the Government’s amendments will achieve smaller retailers several times—are all part of the the same aim. primary authority scheme. The scheme has been received positively and has had widespread uptake and support Lord Tunnicliffe: No change there. from businesses, professional bodies and local authorities. Government Amendment 82 therefore extends the scheme Baroness Barran: Returning to the question asked to the sale of bladed articles and corrosive products. by the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, about weights Amendments 88 and 90 are consequential on the and measures, I am advised that this approach goes earlier amendments. with the grain of existing legislation. We believe that In short, the government amendments in this weights and measures authorities are in fact local group achieve much the same end as the amendments authorities, but I will confirm that in writing. in the name of the noble Lords, Lord Tunnicliffe and GC 307 Offensive Weapons Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 308

Lord Kennedy.On that basis I hope that the noble Lord At present, people who use knives in such ways tell will be content to withdraw Amendment 59. me that the police are understanding, but if we reach the point of being much harder on the carrying of Lord Tunnicliffe: I shall read the Minister’s response knives, I want to be sure that it really is understood with some care, but in the meantime I beg leave to that a locking knife is an essential tool of the trade, withdraw the amendment. that people who have a trade or hobby that requires it will often have it in their possession and that the police Amendment 59 withdrawn. take an understanding attitude to that at a time of heightened tension. I beg to move. Amendment 60 not moved. Baroness Hamwee: My noble friend and I have given notice that we oppose Clause 21 standing part of Clause 21: Amendments to the definition of the Bill. Our concern was that expressed by the noble “flick knife” Lord, Lord Lucas, about people who need to be able to open a knife with one hand because their other Amendment 61 hand is otherwise engaged in the same operation. We Moved by Lord Lucas wanted also to know how the needs of disabled people who may have the use of only one hand are to be dealt 61: Clause 21, page 21, line 27, after “knife” insert “, which with. A button, spring or other device that the noble utilises energy stored in a spring or other device” Lord has described seems to be exactly the sort of Member’s explanatory statement knife that would fall within this clause. I see a problem This amendment is intended to exclude from the provisions of there, and I am glad that he has identified it more the Bill knives that are opened using pressure from the thumb on specifically than we have done. I could not quite see a small protuberance on the blade (rather than a nail nick), to enable climbers, fishermen and others to make use of knives that the way to deal with it, so I took the rather wider can be opened one-handed. approach of opposing the clause standing part, but we have to pin it down in a way that satisfies everyone—and Lord Lucas: In moving Amendment 61, I shall not just by the police being understanding. speak also to Amendment 62. Amendment 61 is intended to remove or make it clear that certain knives do not Viscount Goschen: My Lords,I drawto the Committee’s fall under the prohibition in Clause 21. There are a attention that that this type of knife is often contained number of occupations and trades where it is very in a multi-tool type product, for which there are important to be able to have a knife that can be numerous applications. Motorists, hobbyists, farmers opened with one hand. This is often a safety-critical and all sorts of people regularly carry them. They feature—if you are a climber, an at-sea fisherman, a often have small blades which, because of the multiplicity parachutist or in various other trades that involve the of functions within the product, are accessed by a use of ropes, you need to be able to cut and at the same knob or protuberance of metal. It would be regrettable time use your other hand to hold on to something. if such products were caught by accident within the The way that is generally achieved is to have a small clause. button looking something like a wart on the blade that Perhaps I may ask the Minister a question to which you can push using the pressure of your thumb to I would be happy for her to reply in writing—it refers open it; sometimes the alternative is a large opening in to something that we have recently passed. If an the blade. individual were to steal a knife from a shop, would I want to make sure that the Government are clear they be considered to be guilty also of being in possession that those sorts of knives are not intended to be caught of that knife, of carrying it? If not, I suggest that it by this clause, because—coming on to the history might be looked at in regulations and that the law behind Amendment 62—when Clause 139 of the Criminal should consider it a more serious offence than stealing Justice Act 1988 was promulgated, allowing folding something of the equivalent value of a Mars bar or knives with blades shorter than three and a half inches, some other food item, but it is a technical point. it was widely assumed that that would allow blades that locked, because nobody who is going to use a Baroness Williams of Trafford: I thank my noble knife wants a blade that does not lock. A folding knife friend for clearly outlining the intention of his with a blade that does not lock is a toy—you can use it amendments. On Amendment 61, I say from the outset to sharpen a pencil and nothing much else safely. If that it is not the intention of Clause 21 to prohibit you have any use for it in hobbies or business, you need knives that can be opened manually.The types of knives a blade that will lock open. The locking requirement covered by the legislation are those which can be was introduced as a result of case law. opened automatically, from either a closed position or If the Government wish to maintain that, I would a partially opened position to the fully opened position. like my noble friend to make it absolutely clear that The legislation makes no reference to knives that can “good reason” is understood to be really quite wide. A be opened manually and therefore those knives that tradesman will generally have among his tools a knife can be opened with one hand using pressure from the with a blade that locks, because that is all that is safe thumb on a small protuberance, usually known as a to use. You can therefore expect to find it in and about thumb stud, do not fall under the legislation. their vehicle, when their vehicle is in a public place, or Amendment 62 would exempt folding knives which when they are moving between, or might be going to, may be locked into position when fully extended, places where they will need to employ their knife. provided that the blade is less than three inches long. GC 309 Offensive Weapons Bill [LORDS] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 310

[BARONESS WILLIAMS OF TRAFFORD] tests than opening a pocket knife. I understand what In responding to this amendment, it may assist the my noble friend says about folding knives that can be Committee if I briefly outline the current legislation locked open, but one very much relies on the police to regarding possession of bladed articles. Section 139 of take a sensible attitude to the necessary prevalence of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 makes it a criminal these items among people who use knives for a purpose. offence to carry a knife in a public place, except for I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. folding pocket knives if the cutting edge of the blade does not exceed three inches. Section 139(4) and (5) of Amendment 61 withdrawn. the 1988 Act provide a good reason or lawful authority defence for persons to have the article with them in a Clause 21 agreed. public place. In addition, and without prejudice to the generality of this defence, there are specific defences Amendment 62 not moved. where the bladed article is for use at work, in a person’s possession for religious reasons, or is part of a national costume. Therefore, if a person needs to carry a folding Clause 22: Prohibition on the possession of certain locking knife owing to the nature of the activity to be dangerous knives undertaken—for example, to participate in outdoor activities such as fishing—they can avail themselves of Amendment 63 one of the defences provided in the legislation. Moved by Baroness Meacher 6.45 pm 63: Clause 22, page 21, line 35, at end insert— It is unarguable that knife crime has regrettably “(1AA) A person charged with an offence under been on the increase for a number of years. I am not subsection (1A) who is certified by the relevant persuaded that it would be in the public interest to police force as being addicted to drugs must be relax the current legislation along the lines proposed referred for treatment to an addiction rehabilitation in this amendment. A folding knife that can be locked service, and, if they comply with their treatment, must not be referred to court.” open, if used with criminal intent, can cause as much damage as a knife with a fixed blade. Those who carry Member’s explanatory statement folding knives with a lockable blade for a good reason, This amendment would require those charged with the offence of carrying a flick or gravity knife who are also certified by the including any of the specific defences provided for in relevant police force as being addicted to drugs to be referred to a the legislation, may continue to do so. rehabilitation service for treatment before attending court. Charges The noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, asked about would be dropped if they complied with their treatment. people who have only one functioning hand or work situations where someone needs to be able to open a Baroness Meacher (CB): My Lords, I must first knife with one hand. We are aware of situations where apologise to the Committee that I have been horribly it is necessary to open a knife with only one hand—for absent, but there was an event in the other place that I instance, someone up a ladder will need to be able to had to attend—I will not bore your Lordships with the open a knife easily without having to use two hands. explanation, but there really was no option. This is why knives that can be manually opened with Amendment 63 aims to ensure that vulnerable children one hand are not banned. This includes knives which or young people found with an offensive weapon in a can be opened with a thumb stud, which is one of the public place are assessed for addiction. So many of most common designs.Similarly,knives with a mechanism these vulnerable children and young people are addicted that opens the blade slightly but not completely, and to drugs. If they are found to be so addicted, they can then be fully opened only by hand, will not fall should not be processed through the criminal justice within the definition. system; rather,they should be referred to a rehabilitation My noble friend Lord Goschen asked about shoplifting. service for help with their addiction and related problems. If someone steals a knife and they are under the age of Many of them are homeless and have all sorts of 18, they are most definitely caught by the offence. mental health problems and so forth. The Government Whether they are over or under the age of 18, they have recognised that short-term prison sentences are could be done for shoplifting in addition. I hope that generally unhelpful. Re-offending rates following such answers his point and I ask the noble Baroness to sentences are very high. In the case of drug addicts, a withdraw her amendment. prison sentence will generally achieve—I really mean this—absolutely nothing positive, but it is very likely Lord Lucas: I am grateful to my noble friend— to increase the vulnerability and addiction, and therefore the criminal activity of these young people. Baroness Williams of Trafford: Sorry,may I intervene? Several noble Lords attended an interesting meeting I have been referring to the noble Baroness but I meant yesterday where senior police officers and a police and my noble friend. crime commissioner from the West Midlands explained this. I quote one of the officers, “The police cannot Lord Lucas: I am very grateful—whoever I may be reduce the illegal drugs market, however many drug —toreceivethatanswer,which,inrespectof Amendment61, dealers we arrest and imprison”. That is a powerful was all the comfort I could have asked for. Like the statement on behalf of men on the front line who deal noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, I have the greatest with these things day in, day out. Those people spend difficulty in understanding how a person with one their lives that way. Neil Woods, who has written two hand can open a modern milk bottle. There are greater books about his time as an undercover officer arresting GC 311 Offensive Weapons Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 312 drug dealers over many years, explained that he came The police know perfectly well that we are dealing to realise that he was not achieving any reduction in with victims here. Once involved, victims may want to the availability of drugs. He was completely wasting get out of their situation but do not want to involve his life away, so he changed to a very different view the police for fear of self-incrimination or retribution about how these things should be dealt with. by the perpetrators. They are really caught in the The police officers also talked about how much middle. These victims may carry a knife or other more effective alternatives to punishment are in persuading weapon for self-protection, as I have mentioned. The young people to back away from the illegal drugs real question is whether they are really criminals for market. Ronnie Cowan MP talked about the work in carrying that knife for self-protection. Other noble Glasgow where young people are diverted from the Lords talked about what is in the mind. These children criminal justice system and helped to return to a have got a knife not to attack others, but to protect normal life. Perhaps the Minister will tell the Committee themselves. That surely makes all the difference to whether she is familiar with the work in Glasgow. If one’s approach to dealing with these children. she is not, it may be worth her looking into it before This is a very complex problem but the courts and Report. the prison system are not the right vehicles for dealing This amendment is really important from the pure with victims. Yes, send the gang leaders to prison, though efficiency point of view on reducing addiction and retraining and psychological treatment will be essential crime in this context, but let us also look at it from the for them, too, if they are not to spend their time in point of view of the children and young people involved. prison, come out of it later and then start all over again, As I said at the beginning, a very high proportion of with just a little more bitterness added to what they children found carrying a knife or another offensive already had. I hope we can have a discussion—a weapon in a public place will be vulnerable children, serious discussion—before Report about drug issues who have become addicted to drugs or been targeted in relation to the Bill. I look forward to hearing the by the drug gangs.The Children’sCommissioner estimates Minister’s response and I beg to move. that at least 46,000 children in England are involved in gang activity. It is estimated that about 4,000 teenagers Lord Ramsbotham (CB): My Lords, I support my in London alone are being exploited through child noble friend’s amendment because it advocates one criminal exploitation in what has come to be known as public health approach, along the lines advocated in county lines. These vulnerable children should be seen the serious violence strategy. The sad fact is, however, as victims of trafficking and exploitation rather than that too many of the intervention and preventive as criminals. measures outlined in the strategy are not sufficiently resourced and may not materialise. Gangs are deliberately targeting vulnerable children. Last week, the drugs, alcohol and justice cross-party They watch for a child walking home from school day group that I co-chair heard about an initiative from after day alone, head down, looking miserable. These Thames Valley Police, about which I immediately wrote children are unsafe, unloved or unable to cope for one to the Home Secretary, encouraging him to take an reason or another. Gangs take advantage of their interest in it. It is a diversion scheme—modelled on vulnerability. They threaten or trick children into the mental health diversion scheme so successfully trafficking their drugs for them. They may threaten a introduced after the report by the noble Lord, Lord young person physically or threaten a family member. Bradley—requiring those found to be in possession of They often offer food, which the child or family may drugs to attend for voluntary treatment. The interesting desperately need, alcohol or clothing to the child or thing was that the constables on duty in the Thames their family in return for co-operation. Valley streets reported that they found it extremely Once children have received gifts, they feel indebted simple and clear to use. to the gang. They quickly feel they have no option but As many other noble Lords have pointed out, knife to continue. As many noble Lords will know perfectly carrying is a symptom of wider social issues. Many well, the gangs use these vulnerable children to store young people carry them because they fear for their their drugs and to move cash proceeds or the drugs lives. However, in confirmation of my warning that themselves.No doubt they give them a knife or something too many of the intervention and preventive measures else to protect themselves with. The county lines groups outlined in the serious violence strategy are not sufficiently use high levels of violence, including the ready use of resourced, the Institute of Mental Health in Nottingham firearms,knives and other offensive weapons,to intimidate —I declare an interest as a member of its external and control members of the group and its vulnerable advisory board—has found that only 18% of the victims. The victims are exposed to varying levels of community commissioning groups recognise that they exploitation including physical, mental and sexual harm. have any responsibility for funding probation, which Some of the young people are trafficked into remote includes mental health and drug treatment. This markets to work. Others are falsely imprisoned in emphasises the need for this significant programme of their own homes, which have been taken over using work—words used by the Home Secretary to describe force or coercion. I must say that I had not heard of the strategy—to involve a wide range of government that until I read it rather recently. departments, including liaison between the Home The National Crime Agency report County Lines Secretary and the Secretary of State for Health on this Violence, Exploitation & Drug Supply 2017 analysed issue. the exploitation of vulnerable people, including those with mental health or physical health problems. Sixty-five The Earl of Listowel: My Lords, I support my noble per cent of police services reported that county lines friend’s amendment. She referred to cuckooing, which activity was linked to the exploitation of children. is when a vulnerable adult has someone move in who GC 313 Offensive Weapons Bill [LORDS] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 314

[THE EARL OF LISTOWEL] Baroness Williams of Trafford: I thank the noble then uses their home to supply drugs. I have heard of Baroness, Lady Meacher,for affording us the opportunity this happening in the past among care leavers. Sometimes to discuss her amendment and to outline the Government’s a local authority will provide a young person leaving approach to tackling that combined problem of drug care with a flat but they are vulnerable and feel isolated, misuse and knives. Noble Lords will have heard the so it is very easy for people to take advantage of them noble Lord, Lord Hogan-Howe, talking about the link and start misusing their premises in that way. between knives and the growth of the drugs market. It I attended the meeting yesterday with the former is absolutely right that she has tabled this amendment. undercover detective and a senior detective from the I pay tribute to all the work that she has done in this Midlands police force. They were talking about drugs area and to the work done by the charity of the noble and county lines. I asked them, “Since we are dealing Baroness, Lady Chisholm, to divert vulnerable women in Committee with knife crime and corrosive agents, from prison. do you have any advice relating to your experience on Clause 22 prohibits the possession in public and them?”. The detectives’ response was that dealing private of flick-knives and gravity knives. A person effectively with drugs would probably be a more effective guilty of this offence is liable on summary conviction way of tackling the problem than the legislation we to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months’ are working on at the moment. imprisonment, a fine or both. However, under this amendment, a person who is dependent on drugs would 7 pm have charges dropped if the police refer the person to I thank the Government for taking such a vigorous treatment and the person complies with the rehabilitation role in addressing drug misuse in this country. The treatment. It is worth noting that Clause 25 prohibits National Crime Agency produced a report last week the possession in private—the possession in public is and has been taking action: there were 600 arrests in already a criminal offence—of offensive weapons to which the course of last week. The report revealed that some Section 141 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 applies, 400 vulnerable adults and 600 children had been for example push daggers and zombie knives. referred to safeguarding services. Although I am not The aim of this amendment is that a person who is quite sure who I should attribute it to, there was an addicted to drugs would have charges for possession estimate of 10,000 children, including 16 and 17 year-olds of a flick-knife or gravity knife, but not any other as well as some younger than that, being used by the prohibited knife, dropped if the police refer such a county lines networks. It was a much bigger figure person to treatment and the person complies with the than had been estimated in the past. It is quite a rehabilitation treatment. revelation that so many children are being exploited in this way. I know the noble Baroness and others are keen, as we all are, to deal with the underlying issue where I can only support what my noble friends Lady offenders have a substance misuse problem. We will Meacher and Lord Ramsbotham have said: that their not break the cycle of offending unless we do just that. approach offers a much more humane and effective She and other noble Lords said that. I assure the noble way of tackling this part of the problem. I support it Baroness that the Government are already taking action strongly and hope that the Minister will give a sympathetic to address the links between drug misuse and offending. response. A key aim of the Government’s Drug Strategy 2017 is Baroness Hamwee: My Lords, the Minister will to take a much smarter approach to drug-related expect us to support the principle of what is encompassed offending to address the drivers behind the crime and in this amendment. I do not need to repeat what has prevent further substance misuse and offending. been said about the importance of diverting—in every The police have a range of powers at their disposal sense of the word, with or without a capital “D”—people to deal with drug-related offences in a way that is away from the criminal justice system and towards proportionate to the circumstances of the offender something that can help them to deal with the problem and the public interest. This includes the appropriate in all its manifestations. I am not quite sure about use of out-of-court disposals. We continue to encourage some of the wording of the clause—about the need to wider use of drug testing on arrest to support police look at whether there has been a charge or certification forces in monitoring new patterns around drugs. by the police force—but those points do not detract from our general support for the approach. Baroness Meacher: The West Midlands police and crime commissioner made the point that the police do Baroness Chisholm of Owlpen (Con): I agree with a things almost outside the law, if you like, but it is quite lot of what the noble Baroness, Lady Meacher, has uncomfortable. They want a change in the law to make been saying. In fact, I am involved with a charity in it clear that the right thing for the police to do is to get Gloucestershire which deals with women who would drug-addicted young people into really good services otherwise go to prison; instead, the criminal justice that will move them on and get them right away from system sends them to us. We have three houses in the illegal drug market. I do not think it is okay to say Swindon, Gloucester and Somerset. Most of the women that the police are doing things—even though they who come to us have been drug addicts and we find are—because they are not really happy about it. They that in most cases their problems started when they want the Government to lead. were teenagers. We have had terrific success in treating them in our houses, giving them the chance of a much Baroness Williams of Trafford: We have to get the better life and of moving on. I ask the Government to balance right between protecting vulnerable people think seriously about this amendment. from becoming further involved in drugs or crime GC 315 Offensive Weapons Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 316 generally and criminalising some of the people who led an inquiry into reducing the criminalisation of caused them to get into that life in the first place, which children, and he is concerned to see all agencies working may involve drug abuse. together to keep young people—both those who have I shall outline some of the things the Government left care and those who are in it—out of the criminal are doing, which go right to the heart of what the justice system. What the Minister and the noble Baroness noble Baroness is talking about—early prevention, have said is helpful in this regard. But there is also a intervention and treatment. Noble Lords will have new strengthening duty on the corporate parenting heard me talking about the Home Secretary’scommitment responsibilities of all agencies to support young people to a public health approach to drugs, taking into leaving care. These are important matters to relate to account all the resources that different agencies have this particular issue, and I thank the noble Baroness at their disposal to tackle such problems. The noble for allowing me to make those points. Baroness was talking about the work in Scotland, which is very effective and very good in terms of Baroness Meacher: I thank the Minister very much intervention. for her thoughtful response, but she did not respond NHS England is rolling out liaison and diversion to my reference to Report stage or to whether we could services across the country. They operate at police do something to align this Bill with the Government’s stations and courts to identify and assess people with thinking on people addicted to drugs who get into vulnerabilities, substance misuse and mental health these awful situations with gangs. Does the Minister problems and criminality,which are quite often interlinked. feel able to say something about what we might do They refer them into appropriate services and, where between now and Report? appropriate, away from the justice system altogether. If we went back 10 years, the noble Baroness could Baroness Williams of Trafford: I am happy to discuss talk about the police operating aside from the law, but this further with the noble Baroness. She and I have there is much more understanding now that early had many discussions on this subject—we have not intervention and diversion are the way forward. The had one for a while, so perhaps it would be worth schemes that the NHS is currently running cover having another. Early intervention and prevention, around 80% of the population in England, and we are and a multi-agency approach to assist in diverting looking to full coverage by 2021. people away from the criminal justice system, need to The Department of Health and Social Care and the be balanced with the fact that there are quite hardened Ministry of Justice are working with NHS England criminals out there involved with drugs and gangs and Public Health England to develop the community who we need to capture via the legislation. We need to sentence treatment requirement protocol. The protocol run both in parallel. aims to increase the use of community sentences with drug, alcohol and mental health treatment requirements Baroness Meacher: I thank the Minister, and could as an alternative to custody, to improve health outcomes not agree with her more. In my little remarks, I also and reduce reoffending. It sets out what is expected made the point that there are such hardened criminals from all involved agencies to ensure improved access who are turning these young people into victims. It to mental health and substance misuse treatment for would be good to discuss all that before Report. On offenders who need it. The Department of Health is that basis, I am happy to withdraw my amendment. currently leading an evaluation of the implementation of the protocol across five test-bed sites to inform Amendment 63 withdrawn. further development. The noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, also talked Amendments 63A and 63B not moved. about funding. I do not know whether he knows, but a youth endowment fund of £200 million is being introduced—quite a substantial amount of money. It Amendment 64 will run for 10 years, so it is not a short-term approach. Moved by Lord Lucas The fund will open shortly, so I hope that alongside some of the things we are doing, it will help us in our 64: Clause 22, page 22, leave out lines 29 to 33 and insert— endeavours to tackle some of the root causes with “(2I) It is a defence for any person charged in respect early interventions and diversions from that type of of his or her conduct relating to a weapon to which this section applies— activity. I ask the noble Baroness to withdraw her amendment. (a) with an offence under subsection (1) or (1A), or (b) with an offence under section 50(2) or 50(3) of the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 (improper The Earl of Listowel: I shall briefly raise a matter I importation), should have raised before. I thank the Minister for her to demonstrate that his or her conduct was only for the reply,for the tone of what she said and for her recognition purposes of functions carried out on behalf of the of the need to get to the underlying problems. I Crown or of a visiting force. omitted to develop the concern about children and (2J) In this section— young people in care and care leavers. As the Minister reference to the Crown includes the Crown in right of will know, there is a long-standing concern about the Her Majesty’s Government in Northern Ireland; and criminalisation of young people in care and care leavers. “visiting force”means any body,contingent or detachment Very few arrive into care because of criminal activity, of the forces of a country— but far too many are represented in our prisons, both (a) mentioned in subsection (1)(a) of section 1 of the as children and as adults. My noble friend Lord Laming Visiting Forces Act 1952; or GC 317 Offensive Weapons Bill [LORDS] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 318

(b) designated for the purposes of any provision of secondly, for theatrical use. Both of these are reasonably that Act by Order in Council under subsection (2) self-explanatory. The third defence is for items of of that section, historical importance. which is present in the United Kingdom (including United Kingdom territorial waters) or in any place 7.15 pm to which subsection (2K) below applies on the invitation of Her Majesty’sGovernment in the United Kingdom. Coming under this clause at the moment is a whole (2K) This subsection applies to any place on, under or collection of bits of thuggery that were used in World above an installation in a designated area within the War I, when people were quite commonly not nice to meaning of section 1(7) of the Continental Shelf each other on a large scale. These items, by and large, Act 1964 or any waters within 500 metres of such go for a substantial price. They therefore tend not to an installation. be the sort of thing people will buy to use in crime. (2L) It is a defence for a person charged in respect of There are far cheaper alternatives available if they his or her conduct relating to a weapon to which want to buy something, and, if they do want to shell this section applies— out a large sum of money on an Edwardian sword stick, (a) with an offence under subsection (1), or compared to a modern imitation, there are substantial (b) with an offence under section 50(2) or (3) of the disincentives to being found with one in public—you Customs and Excise Management Act 1979, will lose it and lose a lot of money. These things tend to show that his or her conduct was for— not to be the weapon of choice in crime. (a) the purposes of theatrical performances and of I have tried to construct a defence of historical rehearsals for such performances; importance to make sure that it is the item which is (b) the production of films (within the meaning of exempt and not the person. I do not think it is a Part 1 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 sensible route to go down to designate someone as a – see section 5B of that Act); collector—either an item has historical importance or (c) the production of television programmes (within it does not. One particular weapon to which Clause 22 the meaning of the Communications Act 2003 – see section 405(1) of that Act). applies at the moment is World War II German parachutists’ gravity knives. One of their features is (2M) It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under subsection (1) or (1A) to show that that they have no point; they are not something you the weapon in question is one of historical importance, can use to stab people because they were designed for as certified by subject matter experts from museums cutting parachute lines when you landed. They are blunt or auction houses or militaria experts as designated and have an edge, not a point. They are very specific by the Secretary of State in regulations. items: there are around 10,000 of them in this country (2N) It is a defence for a person charged with an offence and they are worth around £500 a time. We are landing under subsection (1) or (1A) to show that the weapon ourselves with a compensation bill of £5 million for in question is an antique, manufactured before 1945. an object that cannot be used in any sensible way in (2O) For the purposes of this section a person shall knife crime. be taken to have shown a matter specified in subsection (2D), (2E), (2I), (2L), (2M) or (2N) if— We ought to look at the boundary in a sensible way and say that some of these objects are not of any practical (a) sufficient evidence of that matter is adduced to raise an issue with respect to it; and worry to police forces or to us in general because they will never, in any sensible way, be the kind of knife (b) the contrary is not proved beyond reasonable doubt.” people will chose to use in criminal activity. As an Member’s explanatory statement earlier speaker pointed out, there are many millions of This amendment would widen the defences for those charged knives in the UK. These objects are among the least under the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1959 or the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 to cover conduct likely to be used in crime. They are, to those who relating to a weapon for the purposes of functions carried out on collect them, objects of significant value and interest. behalf of the Crown or a visiting force, for the purposes of We should, I think, allow them to continue to be theatrical performance or filming, or in relation to a weapon of possessed. I beg to move. historical importance or manufactured before 1945. Baroness Barran: I am grateful to my noble friend Lord Lucas: My Lords, in moving Amendment 64 I for his explanation of these amendments which relate shall speak to Amendment 65. The purpose of these to the provisions in Clause 22, updating the prohibition amendments is to explore the potential for defences on flick and gravity knives. Amendment 64 seeks to for the weapons covered under Clause 22 to bring widen the defences for those charged under the Restriction them into line with the defences that are available to of Offensive Weapons Act 1959 or the Customs and weapons to which Clause 24 applies. Clause 24 will Excise Management Act 1979 to cover conduct relating cover,for instance, samurai swords. There is a substantial to a weapon for the purposes of functions carried out set of defences available under Section 141 of the on behalf of the Crown or a visiting force, for the Criminal Justice Act 1988, so the second amendment purposes of theatrical performance or filming, or in in this group simply has the effect of closing down relation to a weapon of historical importance or which the relevant bit of the Restriction of Offensive Weapons was manufactured before 1945. It may be helpful if I Act 1959, and dropping all those weapons into Section 141 describe briefly the current legislation and the changes of the Criminal Justice Act, so that we have a common provided for in the Bill. set of defences whatever the particular type of weapon. Section 1(1) of the Restriction of Offensive Weapons If, however, we are keeping it in Section 22, there Act 1959 makes it a criminal offence to manufacture, are a number of defences that we ought to explore: sell, hire or lend a flick-knife or a gravity knife. The first, for forces of the Crown and visiting forces, and, importation of such knives is prohibited by Section 1(2) GC 319 Offensive Weapons Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 320 of the Act. Clause 21 amends the 1959 Act to update operated successfully without an exception for antique the definition of a flick-knife. The current definition is knives. That being the case, I am unpersuaded that we quite old, and new designs are available that mimic the should now alter this approach by merging the regimes speed with which a flick-knife can be opened, but do under the 1959 and 1988 Acts as the amendment seeks not strictly fall under the existing definition. For example, to do. I hope I have been able to persuade my noble in many models currently on the market, the mechanism friend that these amendments are unnecessary and that allows the blade to open at great speed may not be that he will be content to withdraw them. in the handle—as required by the current definition—but the knives nevertheless mimic a flick-knife. The Duke of Montrose: The question of exception Clause 22 extends the current offence of possession for use for theatrical purposes was included in the of a flick-knife or gravity knife in a public place to 1988 Act under Section 141. Is it necessary to repeat it cover any possession, whether in a public or private here? place. These weapons have no legitimate use, and we believe that it is appropriate that they are prohibited Baroness Barran: The advice I am getting is that it is both in public and in private. This will ensure that the necessary because they are subject to different legislation. police will be able to seize these weapons if they come If that is not entirely clear I am happy to write to my across them. noble friend. Clause 22 provides a defence for a person charged Lord Lucas: My Lords, I hope that I will have the with an offence under the 1959 Act if the person opportunity to pursue some details of this with my shows that they have the weapons in their possession noble friend afterwards. I am particularly interested in for the purpose of making the knives available to a what the Government propose to do about the major museum or gallery, or if the person is acting on behalf item to be prohibited under this legislation, which is of a museum or gallery. We have included this defence World War II German paratroopers’ knives. Since these following responses to the public consultation that are of no conceivable use—they are gravity knives but informed the Bill. In relation to whether a defence without a point—they are not something that can should be provided for the purposes of functions sensibly be used in knife crime. I do not know whether carried out on behalf of the Crown or a visiting force, the Government intend to compensate people who are flick and gravity knives have been prohibited for a currently legal owners of these objects and let themselves long time. As my noble friend would expect, we have in for a large bill or whether they are to be turned in consulted the Ministry of Defence about these provisions without compensation, but I am happy to cover those and it has advised us that there is no need for such a matters in conversations between Committee and Report. defence to cover the Armed Forces. In relation to a I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. defence for the purpose of theatrical performance or filming, new subsection (2F) already allows the lending Amendment 64 withdrawn. and hiring of flick-knives and gravity knives by museums or galleries for cultural, artistic or educational purposes. Amendments 64A and 65 not moved. Nor am I persuaded that a defence should be Clause 22 agreed. provided for items of historical importance or which were manufactured before 1945. I am concerned that Clause 23: Prohibition on the possession of offensive this defence may be used by people who want to use weapons on further education premises these weapons in crime. Such a person may deliberately seek to acquire a knife made before 1945, or they may Amendments 65A and 65B not moved. argue that the knife belonged to their parents or grandparents and that the weapons were manufactured Clause 23 agreed. before 1945. I believe that we need to be cautious and should not provide defences under this legislation that Clause 24: Prohibition on the possession of offensive could be easily abused. I hope that my noble friend weapons agrees with me on this point. Amendment 65 also seeks to exclude from the Amendments 65C to 65F not moved. ambit of the law flick and gravity knives manufactured Clause 24 agreed. before 1945. As I understand it, my noble friend’s intention is also to future-proof the legislation to ensure that, irrespective of the passage of time, a flick Clause 25: Prohibition on the possession of offensive or gravity knife manufactured after 1945 can never weapons: supplementary acquire the status of an antique. Again, I hope I can persuade my noble friend that this amendment is not Amendment 66 needed. The 1959 Act does not provide an exemption Moved by Baroness Barran for antique flick and gravity knives. The antique exclusion applies only to weapons to which Section 141 of the 66: Clause 25, page 28, line 10, at end insert— Criminal Justice Act 1988 applies, which brings me to “(2A) In paragraph 1, after paragraph (s) insert— the beginning of my noble friend’s earlier words. I “(t) the weapon sometimes known as a “cyclone knife” accept that there is a disparity between these two or “spiral knife” being a weapon with— provisions, but it is one that has been in place since (i) a handle, 1988. Moreover, the prohibition on flick and gravity (ii) a blade with two or more cutting edges, each of knives has now been in place for 60 years and has which forms a helix, and GC 321 Offensive Weapons Bill [LORDS] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 322

(iii) a sharp point at the end of the blade.”” “(r) the weapon sometimes known as a “cyclone knife” Member’s explanatory statement or “spiral knife” being a weapon with— This amendment would make it an offence under section 141 (i) a handle, of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to manufacture, supply or (ii) a blade with two or more cutting edges, each of possess a weapon known as a “cyclone knife” or “spiral knife” in which forms a helix, and England and Wales or Northern Ireland. (iii) a sharp point at the end of the blade.” (8B) In paragraph 2” Baroness Barran: My Lords, these amendments add Member’s explanatory statement a knife often referred to as a “cyclone knife” or “spiral This amendment would make it an offence under section 141 knife” to the list of offensive weapons prohibited of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to manufacture, supply or under Section 141 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. possess a weapon known as a “cyclone knife” or “spiral knife” in The prohibition will apply in England, Wales, Scotland Scotland. and Northern Ireland. 68: Clause 25, page 28, line 43, leave out “amendment made by Sections 141(1) and (1A) of the 1988 Act prohibit subsection (8) is”and insert “amendments made by subsections (8A) the manufacture, sale or hire, and possession in private and (8B) are” of those offensive weapons specified in an order made Member’s explanatory statement under Section 141(2). Currently 19 weapons are prohibited This amendment is consequential on the Minister’s amendment in England, Wales and Northern Ireland under the at page 28, line 40. Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) Order 69: Clause 25, page 28, line 45, leave out “that subsection” and 1988, with separate legislation applying in Scotland. insert “subsection (8)” So-called cyclone knives are designed and Member’s explanatory statement manufactured in a way that has no purpose other than This amendment is consequential on the Minister’s amendment to cause injury. We have not been able to identify any at page 28, line 40. legitimate alternative uses for such knives. The way they are marketed in the USA is purely in terms of Amendments 67 to 69 agreed. their ability to inflict significant harm to individuals Clause 25, as amended, agreed. and cause maximum injury. We have also seen videos on several platforms where the weapon is promoted 7.30 pm for its ability to pierce police armour and to leave a wound which is “difficult to stitch up”. Although there is no evidence that these weapons Amendment 70 are being marketed in the UK in the same way, we Moved by Lord Tunnicliffe believe that there are no reasons why they should be 70: After Clause 25, insert the following new Clause— on sale. There is no evidence, as yet, that cyclone “Kirpans knives have been used in criminal activity in the UK, although a cyclone knife was discovered by Metropolitan (1) The Criminal Justice Act 1988 is amended as follows. Police officers in a dawn raid in Lewisham in August, (2) After section 141A, insert— along with class A and class B drugs. We believe that “141B Kirpans it is right to act pre-emptively and prohibit these For the purposes of sections 139, 139A, 141 or 141A it knives now. shall be lawful for a person to possess a Kirpan for In defining a cyclone knife, the most important religious, ceremonial, sporting or historical reasons.”” elements are that it has a twisted blade, a point and a Member’s explanatory statement handle. The handle is important because we want to This amendment would ensure that the Kirpan, a mandatory article of faith for a Sikh, possessed for religious, ceremonial, avoid capturing large screws and drill bits in the definition. sporting or historical reasons is exempt from provisions relating Certain types of drill bits will have sharp edges along to the possession of offensive weapons under the relevant sections the length of the bit, but it is the presence of a handle of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. that would make any item useful as a weapon. An implement with twisted blades but a blunt point would Lord Tunnicliffe: Amendment 70, tabled in the name also be limited in its utility as a weapon. Finally, what of my noble friend Lord Kennedy, and with the support distinguishes a cyclone knife from others is that it has of the noble Lord, Lord Paddick, would place in the more than one cutting edge along the length of the Bill a provision to exempt the kirpan from the provisions helix. I am sure noble Lords would agree that there is relating to the possession of offensive weapons under no place for such knives where their only conceivable the Criminal Justice Act. There is no question that the use is as a weapon. I beg to move. Sikh community is fully behind tightening the law on offensive weapons. We are all appalled by the toll that Amendment 66 agreed. knife crime is taking on innocent young lives. The Government have responded to this issue in the Commons Amendments 67 to 69 but I seek to go further, and that is the purpose and Moved by Baroness Barran intention of what I am moving today. 67: Clause 25, page 28, line 40, leave out from beginning to “, The noble Lord, Lord Singh of Wimbledon, raised after” in line 41 and insert— the issue during the Second Reading debate, and my “(8) The Schedule to the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive noble friend Lord Kennedy responded to those legitimate Weapons)(Scotland) Order 2005 (SSI 2005/483) is amended concerns in his speech. Observance of the Sikh faith as follows. for practising Sikhs requires adherence to keeping (8A) In paragraph 1, after paragraph (q) insert— what I understand is called the five Ks, one of which is GC 323 Offensive Weapons Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 324 to wear a kirpan. Larger kirpans are used on many As the noble Lord, Lord Singh, said, it is often gifted religious occasions such as during Sikh wedding to those who come offering friendship to us. I hope ceremonies. It is fair to say that noble Lords in all that, given its essence as part of the Sikh community’s parties and on the Cross Benches would be concerned cultural identity, this will be one area around which we if restrictions in this Bill had unintended consequences will all coalesce. I know that both my noble friends for the Sikh community in observing and practising take these cultural issues seriously, as does the Home their faith or caused upset or concern where a member Secretary, and we need to try to find a way of being of the community was using a kirpan for ceremonial, able to ensure that the Sikh community does not feel sporting or historical reasons. that it has not been heard properly by Parliament. I My first ask of the Minister is that she meet my hope that, when the Sikh community comes, the noble noble friend Lord Kennedy, the noble Lord, Lord Lord, Lord Tunnicliffe, will extend his invitation to all Singh of Wimbledon, and representatives of the Sikh Members who are interested in meeting with them. community. In asking for a meeting, I put on record that the status quo is not adequate, as it only provides Lord Sheikh (Con): My Lords, I begin by saying a defence of religious reasons if a person is charged that I agree with Amendment 70. The amendment with a criminal offence. It does not cover other reasons seeks to protect the tradition of the kirpan and those such as ceremonial, historical or sporting, where kirpans who possess it. It permits individuals to possess the are offered as gifts to dignitaries. The status quo only kirpan for, provides a defence if a person is charged—the amendment “religious, ceremonial, sporting or historical reasons”. in the name of my noble friend will provide an exemption There is disquiet among those in the Sikh community, for the possession of kirpans. The amendment will who feel that their right to possess a kirpan is being provide specific reference in the law for the kirpan, threatened, and they need assurances to be able to do which Sikhs have been calling for. Sikhs are a law-abiding so. There needs to be a comprehensive solution which community who make a wonderful contribution to the is acceptable to the Sikh community. United Kingdom. However, the community still faces I was born and brought up in east Africa, where difficulties in workplaces, education and in leisure there were people of different religions and racial with their kirpans, and this amendment will provide backgrounds. I learned to speak several languages and great assistance in education about the kirpan. I beg developed an understanding and respect for all religions. to move. I am actively involved in promoting harmony and peace between various racial and religious groups. Lord Singh of Wimbledon (CB): My Lords, I thank Although I am a Muslim, I am a patron of non-Muslim the noble Lord, Lord Tunnicliffe. I shall give just a associations, including the Sikh Forum and the British little background. Sikhs are sometimes referred to as a Sikh Association. I am also the chairman of Guru martial race. The description is wrong on two counts: Nanak Worldwide, which promotes the teachings of we are neither martial, nor are we a race. Sikh teachings Guru Nanak Dev Ji, the founder of the Sikh religion. criticise all notions of race or caste, emphasising that I have a strong connection with the Sikhs and we are all equal members of one human race. have visited their temples, which are called gurdwaras, The martial assumption comes from the fact that on numerous occasions. I have studied Sikhism and Sikhs have had to endure being a persecuted minority have written a book on the life and times of Maharaja for many years—at one time, there was a price on the Ranjit Singh. In this book, I have included some head of every Sikh caught dead or alive. Sikhs have principles of the Sikh religion and also mentioned had to develop dexterity with a sword to survive, and, the teachings of the 10 Sikh gurus. The 10th and last importantly, to protect the weak and vulnerable of human guru was Guru Gobind Singh Ji, who transformed other communities in society. Kirpan, the Sikh word the Sikh faith. In 1699, he created the Khalsa, a for sword, means “protector”, and figures prominently community of the faithful who wore visible symbols in religious practice and ceremony. of his faith and trained as warriors. Today, the Khalsa This amendment is particularly necessary to protect community comprises a significant proportion of the the Sikh tradition of presenting a kirpan as a token of Sikh community.As has been mentioned, Guru Gobind esteem. Recipients have included royalty, a former Singh Ji also proclaimed five kakars, which were kacha, Speaker of the Commons and a police chief. Sikhs are karha, kesh, kanga and kirpan. grateful to the noble Lords, Lord Kennedy and Lord Sikhs are proud of the five Ks and therefore comply Tunnicliffe, for introducing this amendment and for a with what has been proclaimed. The kirpan represents large measure of cross-party support. the values of the Sikh faith and is an essential article of faith for the Khalsa Sikhs. The kirpan is curved, Baroness Verma (Con): My Lords, I will also speak contained in a sheath. It is often made of steel or iron to the amendment initiated by the noble Lord, Lord and can be of varying sizes. It is normally worn in a Tunnicliffe. As a member of the Sikh community, strap, which is called a gatra. In the Sikh community, I know that the kirpan is an important part of our the kirpan is used for ceremonial and cultural practices identity. As the noble Lord, Lord Tunnicliffe, rightly such as during weddings and processions. It is also pointed out, it is part of the five Ks, particularly for all used in martial arts and can be given as a gift. In fact, I practising Sikhs. was presented with a kirpan in Amritsar when I visited Adding to what the noble Lord, Lord Tunnicliffe, the Golden Temple.My family’sconnection with Amritsar said, the Sikh community is one of the most law-abiding goes back nearly 200 years, so I was privileged to be in this country. This symbol is often very well hidden presented with a kirpan, among other items, in the when worn; it is there as a symbol and nothing more. Golden Temple. GC 325 Offensive Weapons Bill [LORDS] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 326

[LORD SHEIKH] culture and faith, otherwise it is simply a knife or a The UK as a whole has a long history with the Sikhs, sword. In our discussions with the Sikh community, it stemming from colonial India and the World Wars. was made clear that there is no such thing as a standard We recently celebrated the centenary of the Armistice kirpan. They can come in all forms: some have curved ending the First World War, and I have spoken in your blades and some do not; some have long blades, while Lordships’ House on the contribution of the soldiers others have short blades. The fundamental problem from the sub-continent of India. India raised an army with the noble Lord’s amendment is that it depends on of over 1 million soldiers, 20% of whom were Sikhs. a legally sound definition of a kirpan which until now We owe gratitude to the Sikhs for the sacrifices they simply does not exist. The only thing that distinguishes have made to preserve our way of life. This amendment a kirpan from other swords and knives is its use for is an opportunity to provide a specific defence for religious purposes. those who possess—I emphasise “possess”, as they do Under Section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 not necessarily wear it—the kirpan. it is already a defence to possess a bladed article, I cannot recall any occasion where a Sikh possessing including a kirpan, in a public place with good reason the kirpan has used it as an offensive weapon and or lawful authority. The legislation is clear that good caused physical harm to anyone. This afternoon, in reason includes religious reasons. Similarly,Section 139A fact, I spoke to an ex-commander of the Metropolitan of the 1988 Act, which prohibits possession of a Police who verified what I say; it has not been used as bladed article or offensive weapon on school premises, an offensive weapon by the Sikhs. I therefore feel that includes a good reason defence which again includes a kirpan should not be deemed an offensive weapon religious reasons. As the noble Lord is aware, Clause 25 and provision must be made for that in this legislation. amends the Criminal Justice Act (Offensive Weapons) As has been mentioned, the Sikhs are law-abiding Order 1988 to provide a religious reasons defence people. The kirpan needs to be exempted from the for the possession in private of weapons covered by relevant sections of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. Section 141 of the 1988 Act, which can include large ceremonial kirpans where they have a curved blade of Lord Paddick: My Lords, I support this amendment, more than 50 centimetres. which is why I added my name to it. There is little that The possession of kirpans for religious reasons is I can usefully add because, as members of the Sikh therefore covered under all of the possession offences. community, the noble Lord, Lord Singh, and the In addition to religious reasons, the offences include noble Baroness, Lady Verma, have already articulated other defences—for example, for re-enactment activities exactly why this amendment should be accepted. I hope and sporting purposes, as was mentioned by the noble that the Government can accept it. Lord, and for items of historic importance—but these are not just aimed at kirpans. Baroness Barran: My Lords, I am grateful to the Finally, we should be clear that when a kirpan is noble Lord for setting out the case for exempting all possessed for non-religious reasons it should be treated kirpans from the relevant provisions of the Criminal like any other bladed article. Crime is unfortunately Justice Act 1988. I can reassure him from the outset committed by all parts of our society including, sadly, that both I and my noble friend Lady Williams would the Sikh community. Just because something is claimed be delighted to meet representatives of the Sikh Council to be a kirpan does not mean it cannot be used as a UK and other noble Lords as the noble Lord sees fit weapon, and it is quite right, for example, that the to discuss their concerns. police might want to question why someone is carrying a ceremonial kirpan at three in the morning if they are Before I go on, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Singh, hanging around a former partner’s home. Clearly Sikhs and my noble friend— should be able to own and carry kirpans in public and use them in Sikh martial arts where this is part of their 7.45 pm faith. The law already provides for that. Lord Singh of Wimbledon: Could I just correct that to the Network of Sikh Organisations, not the Sikh Baroness Verma: I hope I can be helpful to my Council? noble friend. The kirpan is worn as part of the five Ks. We do not carry the kirpan in any other form. It is worn. Where the difficulty will lie is that it is always Baroness Barran: I thank the noble Lord for the worn for religious purposes. People who are practising correction. The spirit of my comment is that we will Sikhs have to have it as part of their five Ks. I am respect whoever he feels it is appropriate for the Minister looking to the noble Lord, Lord Singh, who is much and me to meet. I also thank him for his very helpful more experienced in this than I am, as I do not know introduction, which gave us a sense of the historical how we would be able to differentiate the carrying context of the discrimination that Sikhs have faced from the wearing for religious purposes. I understand over the years, despite their values, which he outlined what my noble friend says about gifting it to a non- for us. I thank also my noble friend Lady Verma for practising Sikh when it could be seen as a weapon, but her explanation of the importance of the kirpan to the in worship through the Sikh faith the kirpan is worn as cultural identity of the Sikh community. a religious item. I hope that clarifies this rather than While I have great sympathy for the issue raised by muddying the waters. noble Lords, a key difficulty with this amendment is how to define a kirpan in legislation in a way that does Baroness Barran: I thank my noble friend for her not open up a glaring loophole that could be readily helpful explanation. I hope we can explore these things exploited. A kirpan is only a kirpan in relation to Sikh in detail when we meet, before too long, I hope. GC 327 Offensive Weapons Bill [30 JANUARY 2019] Offensive Weapons Bill GC 328

The Sikh Federation (UK) and the Sikh Council try because otherwise you will get the words that are in UK raised concerns via the All-Party Parliamentary the amendment because it will pass at the next stage”. Group on British Sikhs about the provisions. At that, there was a great writing of things and, lo and behold, the Government managed to find an amendment Lord Singh of Wimbledon: I wish to put in context which was satisfactory. I strongly recommend that the that the Sikh Federation (UK) is not a representative Government make an intense effort to frame an body of the Sikh community. Concerns have been amendment of their own which meets the across-the-board raised by the Network of Sikh Organisations. They support for the spirit of this amendment. are trying to capitalise and muddy the waters. It would be helpful if the Government dealt with the Network Lord Paddick: Before the noble Lord withdraws his of Sikh Organisations, which represents the vast part amendment, it should be said that concerns are being of the Sikh community. expressed at the impression being given by the Government of there being no room for negotiation on this issue. I Baroness Barran: I thank the noble Lord for his hope that they will at least approach that meeting with advice. As I mentioned earlier, the spirit of our meeting an open mind rather than giving the impression, as is that we will take his steer on who we should talk to might be inferred from what the Minister has said about this. The point I raised simply reflected the fact from the Dispatch Box, that there is no room for that those organisations raised concerned with the manoeuvre. All-Party Parliamentary Group on UK Sikhs about the provisions in the Bill. Baroness Barran: I can reassure the noble Lord that the Government will approach the meeting with an Lord Singh of Wimbledon: The All-Party Parliamentary open mind. I tried to be clear that the key issue is Group and the Sikh Federation are one and the achieving a specific definition for a kirpan, which we same thing. They are exactly the same, and everyone will obviously make every effort to work with. We will knows it. see whether that is possible.

Baroness Barran: I thank the noble Lord for clarifying Lord Sheikh: I have had representations from various that point. Concerns were raised on the possession of Sikhs in the past few days—not members of the long kirpans. As a result, the Government amended association but ordinary Sikhs—asking me to speak the Bill to include a defence for religious reasons on this subject. They feel very strongly about it. What rather than religious ceremonies, which is narrower. is being asked for is reasonable. As I said, there is great No concerns were raised in relation to any other disquiet among Sikhs that this is happening. I therefore provisions of the Criminal justice Act. Moreover,members suggest to my noble friend that she enter dialogue and of the Sikh community have been able to carry kirpans not close the door. That would be greatly appreciated in public, including long kirpans, in religious parades—I by the community—I do not necessarily mean the am not sure whether that addresses my noble friend’s association; the noble Lord, Lord Singh, has already earlier point—and the Bill will not change that. I am alluded to that. Let us have a discussion with the therefore not persuaded that a wholesale exemption community to see whether an amicable settlement can for kirpans from the provisions in the Criminal Justice be reached that is acceptable to it. I speak as a Muslim Act 1988 is needed. I fully understand the importance and not as a Sikh. the Sikh community attaches to this issue. Indeed, I understand it better thanks to the interventions of noble Lords. With the reassurance of a future meeting, Baroness Barran: I hear the concerns of several I hope I have been able to persuade the noble Lord noble Lords. I reassure them again that we will enter that we have the balance right and that he will be the conversation with a very open mind. content to withdraw his amendment. Lord Tunnicliffe: I cannot remember the last time Lord Tunnicliffe: This takes me back to those heady I had such broad-based support. I feel that I need to days when we had a Labour Government and I was bask in it for a few seconds, but enough is enough. a lowly Whip. That sounds like a very Treasury I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. counterargument. One day when I was handling a particular clause, I was told that it was impossible to Amendment 70 withdrawn. frame the legislation to meet the need. I said, from my lowly position in the massive meeting, “You’d better Committee adjourned at 7.57 pm.

Volume 795 Wednesday No. 245 30 January 2019

CONTENTS

Wednesday 30 January 2019