Brexit: Negotiations

Debate between Lord Dykes and Lord Bridges of Headley
Monday 24th April 2017

(7 years, 7 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Dykes Portrait Lord Dykes
- Hansard - -

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the principal Brexit negotiation issues following the invoking of Article 50.

Lord Bridges of Headley Portrait The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Exiting the European Union (Lord Bridges of Headley) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the Prime Minister’s letter to the President of the European Council comprehensively articulates this Government’s assessment of the principal negotiation issues. We are pleased that the indications are that both sides wish to approach these talks constructively and we look forward to negotiations beginning when the time comes.

Lord Dykes Portrait Lord Dykes (CB)
- Hansard - -

I thank the Minister for that Answer. Bearing in mind the importance from now on of very close relations with another leading member state—France—and the importance of trade negotiations, will the Government make an effort to have close relations with it in the context of national member states and their responses to the Brexit negotiations to make sure that, even if the Government cannot go as far as accepting the wise advice of Mr Macron when he came to London last February, they will make every effort to make sure that we have a good outcome?

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

I thank the noble Lord for that question. He will not expect me to comment on individual elections in other European member states, but your Lordships can rest assured that my ministerial colleagues and I are doing all we can to have relationships that are as cordial as possible and to build the atmosphere of trust that we wish to see before the negotiations begin.

Brexit: Legislating for the United Kingdom’s Withdrawal from the European Union

Debate between Lord Dykes and Lord Bridges of Headley
Thursday 30th March 2017

(7 years, 8 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Dykes Portrait Lord Dykes (CB)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, the Minister is well known for his engaging sense of perpetual optimism, so can he reassure the House that all the legislation in this vast Bill will be completed by the end of the next parliamentary Session, which presumably will start on 17 May or thereabouts? There will be more or less only a year to make sure that it all goes through. Will he also reassure us that, as the word “instruction” is rather an improper term to use in comparison with “indication”, “judgment” or other softer words, the final vote of the sovereign Parliament, particularly the House of Commons, will be the final decision on this matter?

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

My Lords, the people have said that they wish to leave the European Union and that is what we are doing. As regards the timetable for this Bill, the noble Lord makes a very good point. We obviously have a timetable that reflects the Article 50 process. We fully intend to see this Bill on the statute book as soon as possible so that we can start to use the powers and ensure that our statute book is fit for purpose on the day we leave the European Union.

European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill

Debate between Lord Dykes and Lord Bridges of Headley
Lord Bridges of Headley Portrait Lord Bridges of Headley
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I am sorry to say that the noble Lord is just making my point for me. We had a referendum in which people were asked very explicitly whether they wanted to leave or remain in the EU. The leaflet that I have here said it very clearly, and many people in this House and outside it—on both sides of the argument—made the case that a vote to leave was a vote to leave the single market. That was the choice, people were aware of it and that was the decision that they made. We are going to come on to this in the next hour or so.

Furthermore, many people on both sides of the argument, leave and remain, are now coming together to make a success of our exit from the EU and to forge a new place for our nation in the world. Why would we want to open up all those old divisions again by holding a second referendum, as this very debate has just shown? Well before last June, a number of politicians argued—

Lord Dykes Portrait Lord Dykes (CB)
- Hansard - -

When the Minister talks about the advisory referendum which was giving an opinion, that was the result that we had to respect at the time. Of course, there are comparisons with other European countries; in the process of the European constitution and subsequent Lisbon treaty, it was very interesting that in France, Denmark and the Republic of Ireland, there was always under the compulsory written constitutions a “no” vote in that first referendum. Each one was reversed by their Governments because they knew it was a vote about the unpopularity of internal politics and nothing to do with Europe.

Brexit: Article 50

Debate between Lord Dykes and Lord Bridges of Headley
Thursday 2nd February 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 - - - Excerpts

I am sorry but we come up against this immoveable object, which is the fact that the referendum took place, the people have decided that we wish to leave the European Union, and that is what we intend to do to honour the commitment in our manifesto. I hope only that the noble Baroness agrees with what her noble friend Lord Ashdown said so wisely on the night of the referendum: that when the British people have spoken, our task is to obey. It is only a pity that the noble Lord, Lord Ashdown, cannot agree with what he said then as opposed to now.

Lord Dykes Portrait Lord Dykes (CB)
- Hansard - -

On a recent visit to Berlin, a puzzled and upset very senior German politician asked me, “Can I ask you a psychological question?”, and I replied, “Please do”. The question was, “Why are the English Europhobes so childish?”. I undertook to give him a reply as quickly as possible. Could the Minister help me with an answer to that question?

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

My Lords, I speak here on behalf of Her Majesty’s Government and therefore reflect the views of the Government. I believe that the approach that my right honourable friend the Prime Minister set out in her speech at Lancaster House was far from childish. It is a very mature approach to the challenge that lies before us, and that is what we will now embark upon.

Brexit: Supreme Court Appeal Cost

Debate between Lord Dykes and Lord Bridges of Headley
Thursday 26th 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 - - - Excerpts

My Lords, when we publish the costs we will make them as transparent as possible. On the question of previous processes, I gently remind the House who changed those processes to the situation we have now.

Lord Dykes Portrait Lord Dykes (CB)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I, too, thank the Minister, because he does indeed answer the questions very well, and the whole House is grateful for that. Does he agree that it is not just a matter of the enormous cost of leaving the European Union? In an 8 January article by the Prime Minister in the Sunday Telegraph, she said in her first paragraph:

“When the British people voted in the referendum … they did not simply vote to withdraw from the European Union; they voted to change the way our country works … forever. It was a quiet revolution by those who feel the system has been stacked against them for too long”.


Therefore, there were many factors in that decision overall, and the Government must exercise care, not least over the fear of immigrants. Because of that mixture of feelings, the Government must exercise wisdom and restraint on these matters in the negotiations, because the Prime Minister is not elected directly and the Government’s majority rests on a voting population of 24%. The Government must proceed with care.

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

I hear what the noble Lord says, and I repeat: we wish to build a national consensus around our approach.

Brexit: Green Paper

Debate between Lord Dykes and Lord Bridges of Headley
Monday 9th January 2017

(7 years, 11 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Dykes Portrait Lord Dykes (CB)
- Hansard - -

Can the Minister confirm that he takes a lot of advice from Iain Duncan Smith and Michael Gove?

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

I listen to all manner of people, my Lords, on all sides of the political divide and on all sides of the argument on this.

Council of the European Union: United Kingdom Presidency

Debate between Lord Dykes and Lord Bridges of Headley
Wednesday 20th July 2016

(8 years, 5 months ago)

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

As I say, we will keep the House informed. I am sorry that the noble Baroness feels that way but I have nothing further to add.

Lord Dykes Portrait Lord Dykes (Non-Afl)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, is the Minister familiar with the phrase, “I beg your pardon. Could you say that again?”? Yesterday, clearly, in answer to the noble Lord, Lord Cunningham of Felling, he said:

“The noble Lord speaks with great experience … I absolutely heed what he says but, as I said, that is exactly why we are taking our time to consider these matters”.—[Official Report, 19/7/16; col. 530.]

It is a complete contradiction from yesterday to today without an adequate answer to the question put by the noble Lord, Lord Cormack. Can the Minister explain to the House exactly what happened?

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

I have to say that a number of discussions have taken place informally across Europe, culminating in the conversation that my right honourable friend the Prime Minister had last night. It was a culmination of discussions and consideration.

Trade Union Bill

Debate between Lord Dykes and Lord Bridges of Headley
Tuesday 3rd May 2016

(8 years, 7 months ago)

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

I thank the noble Baroness, the noble Lord, Lord Kerslake, and the noble Lord, Lord Stoneham, for their comments. Where there was discord, we have brought a bit more harmony, at least, on this point. There is clearly disagreement on the need for such a measure, but I would argue that that is precisely why we need the data. What the data will show will determine whether the reserve power needs to be exercised in exceptional circumstances. I very much hope that the assurances I have given today address a number of the concerns expressed by the noble Lord, Lord Kerslake, and others.

On the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Stoneham, about bureaucracy, I simply repeat that a considerable section of the public sector already considers publishing information on facility time to be best practice. I highlighted what is published in the local government transparency code and what the Department for Education recommends that all schools publish. His point about bureaucracy—ensuring that it is kept to a minimum—is of course one that every Government wish to heed.

The noble Baroness, Lady Hayter, raised the question of other issues that are deemed to be relevant. In essence, they must be relevant without being capable of being specified now, because that will be set out in the evidence given when the Government bring in regulations—which, as I said, would be debated by both Houses of Parliament.

With that, I am once again grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Hayter, and the noble Lord, Lord Mendelsohn, for their constructive comments and the conversations we have had. I beg to move.

Lord Dykes Portrait Lord Dykes (Non-Afl)
- Hansard - -

Before the Minister sits down, I intervene briefly to repeat the thanks already expressed by other Peers in the debate on these amendments today and on the previous occasion when the Bill was being considered. We give our thanks to the Government, to the noble Baroness, Lady Neville-Rolfe, and the noble Lord, Lord Bridges, particularly for their very helpful adjustments and changes in response to the earlier debates. It was an outstanding example of how the House of Lords can be genuinely useful to the British public in improving controversial legislation. We are grateful for that progress.

Chilcot Inquiry

Debate between Lord Dykes and Lord Bridges of Headley
Wednesday 1st July 2015

(9 years, 5 months ago)

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

My Lords, once again I have to say that we will have to learn these lessons. My noble friend makes a very valid point, but the inquiry is independent and it is following the process that it has set out.

Lord Dykes Portrait Lord Dykes (LD)
- Hansard - -

My Lords—