All 2 Debates between Lord Bridges of Headley and Lord Lansley

A New Partnership with the EU

Debate between Lord Bridges of Headley and Lord Lansley
Tuesday 17th January 2017

(7 years, 10 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Bridges of Headley Portrait Lord Bridges of Headley
- Hansard - -

My Lords, the noble Lord makes a number of assumptions. A number of economists made a number of predictions before the Brexit vote, a number of which have not come to pass, as the chief economist of the Bank of England admitted the other day. Indeed, only yesterday the IMF’s economic data showed that we are likely to be the fastest growing of all the largest economies in the world. I am not approaching this in quite the same spirit as the noble Lord. I am approaching this as the glass being half full, that we have a very strong basis upon which to grow, and that we will get a successful outcome to these negotiations.

Lord Lansley Portrait Lord Lansley (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Please can my noble friend explain something to me? I understand a customs union or a customs arrangement to imply the free circulation of goods within an agreed area, but if one is outside the common commercial policy and the common external tariff, does that not imply that if we were in an arrangement with Europe, goods that came to Europe from outside could come to the UK and escape quantitative restrictions or EU tariffs? That would necessarily be unacceptable to the European Union. I fail to see what is being explored by way of a customs arrangement that does not imply a common external tariff.

Lord Bridges of Headley Portrait Lord Bridges of Headley
- Hansard - -

The noble Lord makes an interesting point about EU goods coming here and then being exported on to the EU. Clearly, that will be a matter for negotiation. As regards the customs union, the Prime Minister made it clear that we do not wish to be part of the common external tariff but we wish to explore what customs arrangements we might be able to agree on that will enable us to continue free and frictionless trade.

Royal Prerogative

Debate between Lord Bridges of Headley and Lord Lansley
Monday 18th July 2016

(8 years, 4 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Bridges of Headley Portrait Lord Bridges of Headley
- Hansard - -

First, I thank the noble Lord for his kind remarks. As part of the withdrawal process, amendments to the European Communities Act 1972 will need to be considered. That will depend on the outcome of the UK’s negotiations with the EU, and any amendments would require an Act of Parliament.

Lord Lansley Portrait Lord Lansley (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I join in congratulating my noble friend on his additional responsibilities. Following the noble Lord’s question, the fact that the Government do not legally require the consent of Parliament does not mean that they cannot bind themselves to seek Parliament’s authority before entering into a particular action. That is what the Government have done in relation to entering into armed conflict. I put it to my noble friend that sometimes Ministers are not allowed to say something that we all know is perfectly obvious—that Ministers and the Government must seek the approval of both Houses of Parliament before notifying under Article 50.

Lord Bridges of Headley Portrait Lord Bridges of Headley
- Hansard - -

I hear what my noble friend says and, given that he was my first boss, I hear it very well. As the Government have said, Parliament will have a role in making sure that we find the best way forward. Beyond that, on Article 50, I will simply stick with what I have already said.