Debates between Keir Starmer and Ian Blackford during the 2017-2019 Parliament

UK’s Withdrawal from the European Union

Debate between Keir Starmer and Ian Blackford
Thursday 14th March 2019

(5 years, 8 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Anna Soubry Portrait Anna Soubry
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Shame on you! [Interruption.]

Ian Blackford Portrait Ian Blackford (Ross, Skye and Lochaber) (SNP)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am grateful to the right hon. and learned Gentleman for giving way. We are two weeks away from leaving the European Union, as things stand. We are where we are in terms of the amendments that are in front of us today. I would not necessarily have chosen to put down the amendment in the way that it has come forward, but I say to the right hon. and learned Gentleman—our friend and colleague on the Benches beside us—that we have the opportunity with the amendment today to express the views of people in the House of Commons that we must have a people’s vote. I implore him not to stand against the amendment today, or I am afraid that Labour will be found out for what they are: a fraud. They are participating in Brexit happening if they fail to back the people’s vote this afternoon.

Keir Starmer Portrait Keir Starmer
- Hansard - -

Great rhetoric, no substance. [Interruption.] Just to be clear, the amendment that the Labour party has put down today is clear that we seek an extension of article 50 and that we want to find a process to decide where the majority is and how we go forward. Our position has been clear about what we support and I have said it from this Dispatch Box many, many times—a close economic relationship based on a customs union and single market alignment and a public vote on any deal the Prime Minister gets through. That has been our position. I have said it so many times from this Dispatch Box. We want to have those options decided upon but, as the vast majority of people and Members in the House think, today is about extending article 50 and finding a way to that process. It does not rule out those amendments. It does not rule out support for those amendments and to suggest that it does is disingenuous. It is simply saying that today is about extending article 50 and moving on from there.