Thursday Volume 655 28 February 2019 No. 261 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Thursday 28 February 2019 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2019 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. 497 28 FEBRUARY 2019 498 Stephen Barclay: As the shadow spokesman, the right House of Commons hon. and learned Member for Holborn and St Pancras (Keir Starmer), said yesterday,there have been discussions between the respective Front Benches. I agree with him Thursday 28 February 2019 that it is right that we do not go into the details of those discussions on the Floor of the House, but there have The House met at half-past Nine o’clock been discussions and I think that that is welcome. Both the Chair of the Select Committee, the right hon. Member for Leeds Central (Hilary Benn) and other distinguished PRAYERS Members, such as the right hon. Member for Birkenhead (Frank Field), noted in the debate yesterday that there had been progress. It is important that we continue to [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] have those discussions, but that those of us on the Government Benches stand by our manifesto commitments in respect of not being part of a EU customs union. BUSINESS BEFORE QUESTIONS 21. [909508] Luke Pollard (Plymouth, Sutton and NEW WRIT Devonport) (Lab/Co-op): I have heard from people Ordered, from Plymouth living in the rest of the EU who are sick I beg to move that Mr Speaker do issue his Warrant to the to the stomach with worry about what will happen to Clerk of the Crown to make out a New Writ for the electing of a them in the event of a no deal. What meaningful Member to serve in this present Parliament for the County changes can the Secretary of State make to the withdrawal Constituency of Newport West, in the room of Paul Phillip agreement or the political declaration to give them the Flynn, deceased.—(Mr Nicholas Brown.) certainty that these people rightly deserve? Stephen Barclay: The hon. Gentleman is right that we need to secure change. The Brady amendment showed Oral Answers to Questions that in terms of the legally binding change to which the Prime Minister has referred. I am sure the hon. Gentleman’s constituents, like mine, also want to see us move on. The way that we do that, and end that uncertainty, is to EXITING THE EUROPEAN UNION back the Prime Minister’s deal. Hilary Benn (Leeds Central) (Lab): Will the Secretary The Secretary of State was asked— of State confirm to the House that in the discussions to Cross-party Talks which he has just referred the EU has made it absolutely clear that the backstop will not be removed from the withdrawal agreement? 1. Alex Cunningham (Stockton North) (Lab): What progress the Government have made on cross-party Stephen Barclay: The EU has made it clear that it talks on potential changes to the withdrawal agreement wants a deal that will pass this House. It has heard the and political declaration. [909487] concerns about what it says is a temporary agreement—what article 50 says is temporary—and the concern expressed The Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union by the Attorney General in his legal advice that it could (Stephen Barclay): As this is my first opportunity to do be indefinite. It has heard the concerns of this House. so, may I pay my tribute to the former hon. Member for That has been very much the message that the Attorney Newport West? Paul Flynn was a true parliamentarian General, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and and he was respected across the House. I have expressed in those discussions. The EU is engaging The Prime Minister, supported by the Chancellor of in a discussion on how we can address that. the Duchy of Lancaster and others, has met and continues to meet MPs from across the House to understand what Paul Blomfield (Sheffield Central) (Lab): There is will command the confidence of the House. Those significant cross-party support to ensure we do not discussions are ongoing. leave the EU without a deal. On Tuesday, the Prime Minister promised that if her deal failed to win support Alex Cunningham: I pay my compliments to Paul by 12 March the Government would give the House a Flynn. He was a lovely man. He put his arm around chance to reject no deal the following day. Can the quite a few of us in the early days when we were new Secretary of State succeed where the Minister for the Members. Cabinet Office failed yesterday, by telling the House We have had months of no progress or compromise how the Government will vote on such a motion? on the deal from either the UK or the EU, but there has been some good news. Donald Tusk said that the letter Stephen Barclay: I admire the way in which the hon. from the Leader of the Opposition offered a “promising Gentleman asked a question that has been put to the way forward” to solve the Brexit impasse. Surely the Prime Minister and to the Chancellor of the Duchy of Secretary of State agrees that this could be the basis for Lancaster. I very much echo the replies that they gave to cross-party talks, and that we could crack the need to the House. He also touches on a wider point. The protect jobs, trade and rights, and even help the Irish positions of the parties on the winding-down arrangements border question, through a comprehensive customs union? in the withdrawal agreement are closer than the debate 499 Oral Answers 28 FEBRUARY 2019 Oral Answers 500 may sometimes indicate. I think that across the House declaration is vague, broad and, frankly, unconvincing. we agree that we should respect our legal obligations. When will the Secretary of State give us clarity? How Across the House there is a shared commitment to can we in good conscience vote for the deal when we do avoiding a hard border in Northern Ireland. As we saw not know if we will be as safe afterwards? yesterday over the amendment tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for South Leicestershire (Alberto Costa), Stephen Barclay: On this point, the hon. Gentleman there is also cross-party support to protect EU citizens’ and I agree: we want to be in a position where we can rights and the rights of UK citizens in the EU. There is surrender those suspected of crimes in Europe to those much on which we agree. The question is whether countries and they can surrender those individuals to Members across the House will back the deal to end the the UK. That is in our mutual interest. The political uncertainty that businesses and citizens face. declaration does not rule that out and it is in both sides’ interest. After all, we surrendered far more people—around Paul Blomfield: The Secretary of State is right to talk 8,000—to the EU over the last eight or nine years, about ending the uncertainty. Frankly, this is not good compared with around 1,000 that were surrendered the enough. Business demands certainty and the country other way. If there is a murderer or rapist who has needs clarity. This House has already passed a motion committed an offence in Germany, the victims of that expressing our opposition to a no-deal Brexit, so the crime want to ensure that that perpetrator is surrendered Government risk being in contempt of the House. Let there. We also want that to happen. That is why it is in me give the Secretary of State one more chance: when both sides’ interest to reach an agreement. the motion comes forward, will they vote to reject no deal—yes or no? Tom Brake (Carshalton and Wallington) (LD): Of course Germany will not allow the extradition of people Stephen Barclay: The hon. Gentleman puts the same held there to the United Kingdom if we leave the question a second time—[Interruption.] The point is European Union. Is the Secretary of State aware that that he talks about ending uncertainty, and the way to Scotland Yard’s deputy assistant commissioner, Richard end uncertainty is for the Labour party not to go back Martin, said yesterday that leaving on a no deal would on its manifesto and have a second referendum, because lead to a significant slowing down of police activities on a second referendum will prolong the uncertainty. We such things as the European arrest warrant? What may end up with the same result but just a further level discussions has the Secretary of State had with the of uncertainty as we go through a second referendum. Home Office about what extra resources might be needed What we need to do is back the deal, move on and give by the police to maintain the same level of security in a businesses—as he and I agree—the certainty they need. no-deal scenario as currently applies? Martin Vickers (Cleethorpes) (Con): Further to the Stephen Barclay: There was a reason that I chose Secretary of State’scomments about a second referendum, Germany out of the EU27 countries as my example. does he agree that there is considerable cross-party The point I was seeking to raise is that it is in both the support opposing a second referendum? EU’s and our interest to enhance our mutual security by having arrangements.