All 3 Debates between Baroness Fairhead and Lord Cormack

Wed 6th Mar 2019
Trade Bill
Lords Chamber

Report: 1st sitting: House of Lords

Trade Bill

Debate between Baroness Fairhead and Lord Cormack
Baroness Fairhead Portrait Baroness Fairhead
- Hansard - -

My Lords, there is a genuine difference of legal opinion here. My proposal is that we reflect on this and have a meeting, if your Lordships are content to do that, because we have to work through this.

Lord Cormack Portrait Lord Cormack (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I apologise for interrupting at this stage, but is my noble friend prepared to say on the record that this matter can be referred to at Third Reading, if necessary?

Baroness Fairhead Portrait Baroness Fairhead
- Hansard - -

I am unable to make that commitment.

St Petersburg International Economic Forum

Debate between Baroness Fairhead and Lord Cormack
Monday 30th April 2018

(6 years, 6 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Fairhead Portrait Baroness Fairhead
- Hansard - -

I thank the noble Lord for his question. I can confirm that specialist advice is available. We have special advice from the DIT in London and the British embassy in Moscow. Indeed, a number of other expert organisations, such as the Russo-British Chamber of Commerce, can also offer advice, as can a number of individuals in this Room. Advice is available: the DIT offers it and it can be accessed on location in Moscow, too.

Lord Cormack Portrait Lord Cormack (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, if Ministers from other Governments will be present—as they clearly will be—what is deterring British Ministers from standing up for our country, negotiating and taking part in meetings and gatherings of this sort? Absence achieves nothing.

Baroness Fairhead Portrait Baroness Fairhead
- Hansard - -

In terms of our stance on Russia, and in response to actions in Syria and Ukraine and the Salisbury attack, we are trying to show that this matter is a real threat to a rules-based international order. We are trying to send a clear message that those actions are unacceptable and illegal and to give a calibrated response that shows how unhappy we are with them, while continuing to engage in other areas and support businesses that take part in sanctions-compliant activity. We think that is the right way to do it.

United States Tariffs: Steel and Aluminium

Debate between Baroness Fairhead and Lord Cormack
Tuesday 13th March 2018

(6 years, 8 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Fairhead Portrait Baroness Fairhead
- Hansard - -

I thank the noble Lord. We have had a long and enduring relationship with the US and, in the past, when protectionist measures were applied—for example, in 2002—they were eventually rowed back and the relationship continued. It is important that we continue to demonstrate the benefits of free trade. The number of jobs expected to grow in the UK steel industry versus the number that might be lost in downstream industries indicate that potentially, this is not a good move in the US. A recent think tank report said that there could be a net loss of around 146,000 jobs in the US if this was put in place. We need to argue for free trade. We have a long and enduring relationship and the UK/US economic, national and defensive co-operation will endure long term into the future.

Lord Cormack Portrait Lord Cormack (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I congratulate my noble friend on the way she is handling this delicate and tricky matter. I hope that she will be involved in some of these negotiations and, if she is, that she will reinforce the fact that we are working with friends and neighbours in the European Union and that this ought to be an object lesson to everyone who has the interests of our country at heart.

Baroness Fairhead Portrait Baroness Fairhead
- Hansard - -

I thank my noble friend for his supportive words. Although officially I am not in the Trade Policy Unit—I am concentrating on exports—I obviously have interactions with it. It is likely that I will visit the US in a few weeks’ time and I will continue to represent the importance for us of addressing the excess steel capacity in the world, which is the root cause of the problem. We have made good progress along those lines. Where we see other countries behaving improperly, we are able to initiate anti-dumping or anti-subsidy measures. In the UK alone there are 45, which have proved to be effective. We will continue to fight but it is important that we do so within a rules-based system.