UK Exports

Debate between Baroness Mobarik and Lord Purvis of Tweed

Tuesday 24th January 2017 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Mobarik]

The noble Baroness is absolutely right. I can reassure her that the Prime Minister has been clear: we seek a bold and ambitious free trade agreement with the European Union, covering tariff and barrier-free trade in goods and services, offering the fullest possible access to the single market for British companies. In relation to particular areas and sectors, since 2015 the Department for International Trade has carried out extra northern export missions and since 2016, Midlands missions. We have introduced teams to lead investments in the north and the Midlands. We are looking at a whole array of different measures to improve our exporting.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

Both the noble Lord, Lord Bridges, and the noble Lord, Lord Price, have told committees of this House that the Government have been conducting an exercise to consider what the costs and burdens on British business would be in leaving the customs union. Now that the Government have their policy to leave the customs union, presumably that assessment has been concluded. Will they publish it so that Parliament is able to consider this before it is asked to vote to trigger Article 50?

Brexit: Trade

Debate between Baroness Mobarik and Lord Purvis of Tweed

Tuesday 1st November 2016 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Mobarik]

Yes.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

Has the Minister seen the website of the Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade website, which states:

“What does Brexit actually mean? … Leaving the EU will take the UK years. How many is unclear”?

If noble Lords will forgive me, I will read from the website a little further:

“The UK will need to complete Article 50 exit negotiations with the EU, and determine its domestic trade and regulatory settings before it is able to negotiate FTAs with third countries, such as Australia”.

Does the Minister agree? The Australian Government also say—

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Purvis of Tweed]

The Australian Government also say:

“The Government is seeking clarity from the UK Government on its expected approach to EU departure”.

Are the UK Government providing that clarity to the Australian Government and, when they do so, will they provide it to this Parliament, too?

[Baroness Mobarik]

I am sorry, but I only half-heard that question, first, because of the enthusiasm of my noble friends behind me but also because of the length of the question or questions. Perhaps the noble Lord would pick out one question and then I will answer.

International Development Aid

Debate between Baroness Mobarik and Lord Purvis of Tweed

Wednesday 19th October 2016 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Mobarik]

I thank the noble Lord for his question, and I commend him on his work with the APPG on Global Health. We welcome the overall findings of the Triple Impact report on nursing and are committed not only to training new nurses but to improving the skills of nurses already deployed. We support an array of health professionals, embracing a whole-system approach which is aligned with country priorities. For example, the Health Partnership Scheme supports UK health professionals to volunteer to build health workforce capacity in around 30 developing countries.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, the Minister will be well aware of the overwhelming consensus in this House in 2015 during passage of the international development Act, on which I had the privilege to be the Member in charge. The House should also be very proud that in the 2016 Aid Transparency Index, the UK was the leading country in the world for aid transparency. Was the Minister therefore not as surprised as I was to read in the Mail on Sunday of 9 October the following words attributed to Priti Patel, the Secretary of State:

“I’ll defy order to blow £12 billion on foreign aid”?

The article continued:

“International Development Secretary told aides she’ll ignore requirement”.

Will this Government act within not only the word but the spirit of the law, and will they not only meet their international obligation year on year but work with our friends and colleagues in countries around the world who do not meet theirs? We should be leading by example, not by such damaging and inconsistent headlines in the Mail on Sunday.

[Baroness Mobarik]

I thank the noble Lord for his question. I think we are leading by example. We are meeting the 0.7% target, which is a manifesto commitment. It is enshrined in law. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State has been unequivocal that we will continue to honour that promise.