Debates between James Cleverly and Pat McFadden during the 2017-2019 Parliament

Exiting the European Union

Debate between James Cleverly and Pat McFadden
Monday 20th May 2019

(5 years, 6 months ago)

Ministerial Corrections
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Pat McFadden Portrait Mr McFadden
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

17. How much Government Departments have spent on preparations for leaving the EU without a deal.

James Cleverly Portrait James Cleverly
- Hansard - -

Additional EU exit funding allocated by Her Majesty’s Treasury to Departments and devolved Administrations covers all scenarios. No-deal spending cannot readily be separated from deal spending, given the significant overlap in plans in many cases. Since 2016, the Treasury has allocated more than £2.4 billion of funding for all exit scenarios.

[Official Report, 16 May 2019, Vol. 660, c. 358.]

Letter of correction from the Under-Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, the hon. Member for Braintree (James Cleverly):

An error has been identified in my response to the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton South East (Mr McFadden).

The correct response should have been:

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between James Cleverly and Pat McFadden
Thursday 16th May 2019

(5 years, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Pat McFadden Portrait Mr Pat McFadden (Wolverhampton South East) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

17. How much Government Departments have spent on preparations for leaving the EU without a deal.

James Cleverly Portrait The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (James Cleverly)
- Hansard - -

Additional EU exit funding allocated by Her Majesty’s Treasury to Departments and devolved Administrations covers all scenarios. No-deal spending cannot readily be separated from deal spending, given the significant overlap in plans in many cases. Since 2016, the Treasury has allocated more than £2.4 billion of funding for all exit scenarios.[Official Report, 20 May 2019, Vol. 660, c. 6MC.]

Pat McFadden Portrait Mr McFadden
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Despite talking up and legitimising a no-deal outcome for two years, the Prime Minister applied for two different extensions to the article 50 period to avoid that outcome, because she knows it would be damaging to the country. The Minister talks of £2.4 billion. Would that money not have been better spent on the fight against knife crime, on helping families struggling to cope with universal credit or on 100 other causes that would benefit our constituents, rather than on an argument that, by the Prime Minister’s actions, she has shown she does not even believe in?