Brexit Readiness: Operation Yellowhammer

Debate between Deidre Brock and Michael Gove

Wednesday 25th September 2019 Commons Chamber

[Deidre Brock (Edinburgh North and Leith) (SNP)]

The Minister’s statement suggests that progress has been made since the Operation Yellowhammer document was leaked, but it is a little bit difficult to check against delivery, so when will he publish the most up-to-date version?

[Michael Gove]

I have just updated the House on the many, many steps that we have taken in order to ensure that we are better prepared.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Deidre Brock and Michael Gove

Thursday 21st February 2019 Commons Chamber

[Michael Gove]

My right hon. Friend is absolutely right. Anaerobic digestion can play an important part in dealing with food waste and making sure that we have a truly circular economy. We want to work both with local authorities and with farmers and land managers to make sure that, where appropriate, anaerobic digestion can be expanded.

[Deidre Brock (Edinburgh North and Leith) (SNP)]

The Secretary of State will accept that food produced here that cannot go to market in the EU and cannot be sold here profitably will increase food waste. Will he reverse the change in the guidance on protected geographical indications that he issued last week and provide Scotland’s high-quality food and drink exporting industry with all the support that it needs to maintain protections across the EU rather than leaving producers to do it themselves all over again?

[Michael Gove]

All the geographical indications that Scotland’s outstanding food producers and other producers enjoy will be protected in the future. The real danger to Scotland’s food producers is a Scottish Government who are not prepared, I am afraid, to use the Agriculture Bill that is currently before the House to provide our outstanding food producers with the legislative framework that they need. In that respect, I am afraid that the Scottish Government are being negligent, and not for the first time.

Agriculture Bill

Debate between Deidre Brock and Michael Gove

Wednesday 10th October 2018 Commons Chamber

[Deidre Brock]

Thanks for that, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is always a delight to hear just how warmly we are welcomed by Members in this place from other parties, especially those on the Government Benches.

Returning to my point, these are plans made by England’s Ministers for England’s industry: policies created by English Ministers to be English solutions to English problems. The sensible approach, I would argue, is to embrace Scottish solutions to Scottish problems and Welsh solutions to Welsh problems. Ministers in the Scottish and Welsh Governments should be in full control.

[Michael Gove]

Why is it that the Welsh Administration are capable of providing a schedule to the Bill for Welsh needs, but the Scottish Government are not? Why are the Scottish Government silent on future policy for Scotland’s farmers? Why is it that we are providing certainty for farmers in the United Kingdom, as the Welsh Labour Administration are doing, but the hon. Lady is so recklessly negligent of rural Scotland’s interests?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Deidre Brock and Michael Gove

Thursday 12th July 2018 Commons Chamber

[Michael Gove]

It would be reckless of any Government to do anything that would imperil the ambitions and aspirations exhibited by the exemplary constituents whom my hon. Friend serves so well.

[Deidre Brock (Edinburgh North and Leith) (SNP)]

The White Paper makes it clear that the Government do not intend to change the method for allocating existing quotas. Two thirds of UK fish quotas are controlled by three huge companies, and small boats are being squeezed. Is it not time for the Government to admit that Scotland’s fishermen will see absolutely no benefit from Brexit, but will lose access to the world’s biggest marketplace?

[Michael Gove]

Almost everything in that question was wrong, but that does not surprise me because almost everything in the Scottish National party’s position on fisheries is wrong. It wants to stay in the European Union and therefore in the common fisheries policy and yet it wants Scotland’s fishermen to enjoy all the advantages of being outside the common fisheries policy. Some Members of this House have been accused of wanting to have their cake and eat it. I am afraid that SNP Members want to have a whole chain of bakeries and eat everything in them. If hypocrisy were a term that was allowed to be used in this House, then it would fit the Scottish National party like a bunnet.

Sustainable Fisheries

Debate between Deidre Brock and Michael Gove

Wednesday 4th July 2018 Commons Chamber

[Michael Gove]

When my right hon. Friend was a DEFRA Minister, he contributed significantly to improvements to the common fisheries policy, and fishing and coastal communities throughout the United Kingdom owe him a particular debt. He is right on both his points: in or out of the CFP, we have to make sure that conservation measures are at the heart of our future policy, and it is also right that we do more, particularly for coastal communities where they use inshore vessels, to ensure that opportunities are reallocated to benefit them and the communities and businesses built around them.

[Deidre Brock (Edinburgh North and Leith) (SNP)]

We have heard so much about red lines since 2016, but those red lines might now be considered red herrings. I have read the documents issued this morning. Given the commitment to

“continue to work with our European partners to regulate fishing and to set harvest rates”,

will the fleets still be subject to the CFP, but without a Minister at the table when decisions are being agreed? Given that maximum sustainable yield has been established and the Secretary of State has already made it clear to the Danish fleet that it and all others will still be welcome to fish in UK waters, will our fleets continue to be subject to the same quotas as they currently are?

Given that the UK Government

“will consider whether and how to replace”

the European maritime and fisheries fund, is there a possibility that the fleets will receive reduced funding, or that funding might be redistributed on an uneven footing to suit a Government’s political ends? Is there even a possibility that the fleets will no longer receive funding at all? I note the point about the World Trade Organisation wanting to see an end to fisheries subsidies, but wonder whether raw, unfettered competition is really best for Scotland’s fishing fleet.

On partnership working, the Government say that frameworks will “not normally” be changed without the devolved Administrations’ consent. That “not normally” bothers me. May we have a guarantee that frameworks will not be put in place without the explicit agreement of the Scottish Government? Welsh and Northern Irish Members will no doubt press a similar case. May we also have a guarantee that no future changes will be made without unanimity—that no Administration will be overruled?

Finally, before Mr Speaker’s eyes turn disapprovingly upon me, I note the establishment of an English marine management reserve; will that have Barnett consequentials?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Deidre Brock and Michael Gove

Thursday 7th June 2018 Commons Chamber

[Deidre Brock (Edinburgh North and Leith) (SNP)]

5. What plans he has to ensure that environmental standards are maintained after the UK leaves the EU.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Michael Gove)]

As the House will know, the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill provides continuity and maintains high environmental and other standards as we leave the European Union. My Department is consulting on environmental principles and governance to ensure that we can have a world-leading body to hold the Government and others to account in order to maintain high environmental standards.

[Michael Gove]

As ever, Mr Speaker, you anticipate my wishes with perfect clarity.

[Deidre Brock]

The “polluter pays” principle underpins the EU’s approach to protecting the environment. Will the Secretary of State commit to the post-Brexit watchdog having legally enforceable powers to make sure the polluter still pays when it damages our land, air and sea, even if that is the UK Government breaking air pollution rules?

[Michael Gove]

The hon. Lady makes three very good points. First, yes, the polluter pays principle is an important one to maintain. Secondly, we do need enforcement powers. Thirdly, of course, if the UK Government are in breach of air quality rules, it will be the case, as in the past, that they have to be held accountable.