Legislating for UK Withdrawal from the EU

Debate between David Davis and Mike Gapes

Thursday 30th March 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

My hon. Friend is right and that is exactly why the Prime Minister made that a very important central piece of our policy.

[Mike Gapes (Ilford South) (Lab/Co-op)]

Yesterday, the Prime Minister did not mention the customs union in her statement and nor is it referred to in her letter to President Tusk. Paragraph 1.22 says that

“we will introduce a customs bill to establish a framework to implement a UK customs regime.”

Will the Secretary of State confirm that he intends to take us out of the customs union?

[Mr Davis]

Unusually for the hon. Gentleman, as an ex-Select Committee Chairman, he missed the fact that the Prime Minister made direct reference to the White Paper, which covers exactly that point.

Article 50

Debate between David Davis and Mike Gapes

Tuesday 24th January 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

I can send my hon. Friend the details, but the number of meetings is beyond counting; we have had meetings with manufacturing, aviation, tourism, finance and banking, insurance and so on. Not just my Ministers but Ministers across Government are talking to their own client industries, as it were, to ensure they know what their concerns are, what the opportunities are and what policy measures we have to take to maximise the opportunities and mitigate any concerns. It took a few months, but people are beginning to see the opportunities, rather than the concerns, which represents an incredibly important change in mood in our country.

[Mike Gapes (Ilford South) (Lab/Co-op)]

The Secretary of State has twice said that the point of no return was on 23 June, and he has ruled out a White Paper and a vote on the plan. Does he agree that neither the words “customs union” nor “single market” were on the ballot paper? If the House decides, at some point after article 50 has been triggered, that it does not wish to proceed with the process, would we leave automatically or is it reversible?

[Mr Davis]

First, I have listened to people talking about what was not on the ballot paper. It is rather like saying, “You said you were going to sell the car, but you didn’t say you were going to sell me the engine and tyres as well.” These elements—the common external tariff barrier, the common commercial policy, the role of the European Court of Justice, and so on—are components of the EU, which the public voted to leave. Secondly, the hon. Gentleman misquotes me. I have said that there will be any number of votes and debates in the coming two years, many of them about the issues he talks about.

Article 50

Debate between David Davis and Mike Gapes

Monday 7th November 2016 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

I have stated my view on the proper approach for the Government. That does not constrain Parliament at all.

[Mike Gapes (Ilford South) (Lab/Co-op)]

The Secretary of State has referred to the timetable for article 50. Once it is triggered, we have a maximum of two years. Does he agree that, if we do not have agreement towards the end of that period, we face a ticking clock, which weakens our position? Is there merit in the suggestion in today’s Financial Times, which apparently the Prime Minister is considering, to have a transitional arrangement of several years afterwards? Is it not time that hon. Members debated that?

[Mr Davis]

I am afraid I do not recognise anything in today’s Financial Times.

Exiting the European Union

Debate between David Davis and Mike Gapes

Monday 5th September 2016 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

My right hon. Friend is not known for understating his case, but I would point out that it was 17.5 million people who made that judgment. He is right: much of the gloom and doom and fearmongering that went on before the referendum has been proven to be wrong. That said, I would not be quite so unalloyed in my optimism as he is, because of course we are in a world where there are a lot of economic pressures. That is why the meetings in China are taking place now. He makes his point brilliantly, as always, and I agree with its main thrust, but let us not get too optimistic before we close the deal.

[Mike Gapes (Ilford South) (Lab/Co-op)]

The Secretary of State said that he wants to have the supremacy of this Parliament. If we are a sovereign, supreme Parliament, why is this Parliament not going to have the decision as to when we trigger article 50?