Global Britain

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Monday 3rd February 2020 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

There is no requirement for alignment under the withdrawal agreement, and the political declaration sets out our commitment to discuss open and fair competition as part of negotiations on an ambitious future relationship. As the noble Baroness rightly says, we already start from a place of exceptionally high standards and we intend to maintain our standards in all these areas. In many instances we actually have higher standards than the EU and we do not need a treaty in order to do that. We are absolutely committed—we have made commitments time and again and have said repeatedly that we do not intend to lower our high standards; we intend to lead the world.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch (Non-Afl)]

My Lords, the Statement says:

“We will have a new relationship with the EU, as sovereign equals, based on free trade.”


May I repeat an Oral Question I put to the Government last Thursday, 30 January, which I fear they did not understand? It was whether they would

“offer the European Union a new treaty, subject to World Trade Organization jurisdiction, which would continue the United Kingdom’s existing trading arrangements with the European Union”.—[Official Report, 30/1/20; col. 1506.]

What better free trade could we have than that? I suggested then that this offer would be generous to the European Union, if accepted, and would get rid of the Irish border problem, the need for much of Operation Yellowhammer and the endless lengthy trade negotiations which lie ahead. Can the noble Baroness explain why we do not do that?

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

We have set out our negotiating mandate and what we intend to discuss with the EU in this WMS. That is the basis upon which we will be taking forward our discussions. What the Prime Minister has made very clear is that we are looking to negotiate an FTA like Canada’s, covering goods, services and co-operation in other areas. That is what we have set out, that is the position we will be starting with, and we look forward to engaging with the EU over the coming months in order to make sure that we have an excellent deal for both sides.

Leaving the European Union

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Wednesday 22nd May 2019 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

My noble friend is absolutely right that the withdrawal agreement is an agreement between the United Kingdom and the European Union. The EU has been very clear that this is the only deal available and that it will not be reopening the withdrawal agreement. All the arguments are about the future relationship. We need the withdrawal agreement to leave the EU; we need it in all circumstances, whatever your vision for the future relationship with the European Union. We have put together this offer, in the hope that MPs will support it, so that we can move on to the important issues both within this country and around defining our future relationship with the EU.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UKIP)]

My Lords—

European Council

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Monday 25th March 2019 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

The Council formally endorsed the legal instrument relating to the withdrawal agreement and the joint statement supplementing the political declaration. There was further movement at the Council with this formal approval, so that is a change to the withdrawal agreement since the last vote.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UKIP)]

Given the ever deepening Brexit crisis, why do the Government not stand well back, take a deep breath and a clean sheet of paper, and make the most obvious of offers to Brussels? I ask again why the Government do not offer EU citizens continuing reciprocal residence for, say, a couple of years, and offer continuing free trade, but under the WTO, which gets rid of the Irish problem. We could talk about how much money we may give the EU when that has been accepted. Are the Government making such a mess of Brexit because they do not want us to leave the EU? Is that the underlying truth?

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

No, over the past two-and-a-half years, the Government have worked extremely hard to get a deal that is in the best interests of the UK and the EU and to deliver on the result of the referendum. The Prime Minister has been categorically clear on that. That remains our position, and that is why we will be working very hard to try to bring a vote back this week so that we can leave in an orderly way and in a way that we believe is best for the British people.

Leaving the European Union

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Tuesday 12th February 2019 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

I am happy to reiterate our commitment to the Belfast agreement and indeed the commitment of the Irish Government and the EU. What we need now is to work constructively together. We are at a critical time of the negotiations and have some difficult discussions ahead. I think that we all want to move forward in a constructive manner and make sure that we can get a withdrawal agreement and the changes we are seeking that mean that the House of Commons will approve this deal and we can all move forward to talk about our bright relationship.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UKIP)]

My Lords, I hope I detect a chink of light in this Statement where it says:

“Given both sides agree we do not ever want to use the backstop, and that if we did it would be temporary, we believe it is reasonable to ask for legally binding changes to this effect”.


Does the Leader of the House agree that if the EU refuses to agree such legally binding changes, that would confirm that it remains in bad faith, and it regards the backstop as a device to stop us ever getting our sovereignty back, even eventually?

If that turns out to be so, why do we not offer the people of Europe continuing reciprocal residence and continuing free trade, but under the WTO, and, if that is not accepted, just go it alone under the WTO anyway, which holds no fears for us?

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

As both we and the EU have made clear, we do not intend to use the backstop. The Prime Minister, as I have said, is looking at three options in which the House of Commons has expressed an interest. These are alternative arrangements, such as technological solutions, a legally binding unilateral exit clause and a legally binding time limit. President Juncker and the Prime Minister had a conversation and have agreed that further talks will begin, and they will take stock later this month. We look forward to that having a successful outcome.

Leaving the European Union

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Monday 21st January 2019 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

The Prime Minister is being flexible and is looking forward, because she is opening dialogue with MPs and parties across the House of Commons. The purpose of those meetings is to find areas of consensus on a way forward so that we can move on.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UKIP)]

My Lords, have the Government read the paper published on 7 January by the noble Lord, Lord Lilley, and Councillor Brendan Chilton entitled 30 Truths about Leaving on WTO Terms; that is, about leaving without a deal? If they have read it, will they say whether they disagree with any of it? If they agree with it, will they support it publicly and at least try to enlighten those who still believe, or pretend to believe, that leaving without a deal would be some sort of disaster, whereas it would be much preferable to the non-deal which is on the table?

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

I am afraid that I disagree with the noble Lord. The Government believe that we can do better than trading under WTO rules, which is why we are taking forward the deal. WTO rules would mean tariffs and quotas on British goods going to the EU; for instance, trading on WTO rules would mean a 10% tariff on cars that we sold to the EU and average tariffs of over 35% on dairy products. We believe that leaving with a deal is the best option.

Leaving the European Union

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Monday 14th January 2019 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

I do not agree. The backstop we have negotiated gives the UK tariff-free access to the EU market without the free movement of people, without financial contributions, without having to follow most of the level playing-field rules and without allowing the EU to have access to our waters. That is not something that the EU wants.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UKIP)]

My Lords, have the Government read the paper published yesterday by Economists for Free Trade entitled “No deal is the best deal for Britain”? If not, will they do so and answer it publicly? Clearly, the scare stories that have been put around about what will happen if there is no deal are complete nonsense, to put it mildly.

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

I can only reiterate that we believe that there is a good deal on the table, which MPs will vote on tomorrow. I hope that they support it so that we can move forward.

Leaving the European Union

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Monday 26th November 2018 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

No. First, we will be able to develop an independent UK trade policy. The political declaration sets out a plan for a free trade area for goods with the EU, including zero tariffs, with ambitious customs arrangements to enable that. It will be the first such agreement between an advanced economy and the EU.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UKIP)]

Last Thursday, the Minister told your Lordships that the financial settlement on the deal would cost between £34 billion and £38 billion, but she did not answer my question on when that money will be handed over. In particular, I want to press her on whether it will be handed over only when all the pious hopes in these agreements have been fulfilled. If they are not, surely we will not hand over a penny.

Brexit: Negotiations

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Thursday 22nd November 2018 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

I agree with the noble Lord and thank him for his positive comments.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UKIP)]

The Statement says that there will be,

“a fair settlement on our financial obligations—less than half what some originally expected”.

The amount of that fair settlement is already well known but I hope that the House will forgive me if I ask how much it will be and when we will hand it over. Will it be after the many pious hopes in this Statement have been fulfilled? I very much hope that we will not hand anything over until that happens.

European Council

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Monday 18th December 2017 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

I can only repeat what I said last week: the Cabinet is united and we are looking forward to a very constructive discussion tomorrow.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UKIP)]

My Lords—

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

No, I am afraid I do not, because we have all pledged that there will be no hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch]

My Lords—

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch]

My Lords, the Statement says that the Government will propose that our free trade with the EU should continue as now. Do the Government fear that the Eurocrats will be arrogant enough to refuse this offer which, as I have mentioned before, would be much more in EU exporters’ collective interest than it would be in ours because, if we are all forced back to the WTO, they will pay us some £13 billion in extra tariffs and our exporters will pay them about £5 billion? Can the Government assure your Lordships that they will hold firm on this offer, enlisting, if necessary, the support of EU exporters? Going further, why should our free trade together not continue indefinitely? Would that not also be quite helpful with the Irish border problem?

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

I am afraid I do not agree with the noble Lord. The fact that we have got to where we are shows that there is willingness on both sides to work together to make sure that we have a good outcome for both the EU and the UK. I look forward and expect that we will continue the phase 2 negotiations, including around the details of the implementation period, in the constructive manner we have seen so far.

Brexit Negotiations

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Monday 11th December 2017 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

We have agreed a number of important principles that will apply as to how we arrive at valuations in due course. These will ensure that the process is fair to the UK. As we leave and pay off our commitments, there will be significant sums left to spend on our priorities and a precise schedule of payments will be agreed in the second phase.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UKIP)]

My Lords, when we come to negotiate our future trading relationship, why do the Government not say that we will be generous and offer continuing free trade? That is, after all, much more in their exporters’ interest than it is in ours. I say this because, as the excellent Civitas analyses show, there are about 6 million jobs in the EU exporting to us and we have about 3.5 million jobs exporting to them. If the Eurocrats are selfish enough to force us to the WTO conditions instead, their exporters will pay us some £13 billion in new tariffs, whereas we will pay them only about £5 billion. As to what cash we should pay them, surely we should leave that to the very end of the negotiation, and its amount should depend on whether they have tried to mess around with the City of London in the meantime.

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

We are committed to seeking continuity in our current trade and investment relationships, including those covered by EU FTAs and other preferential trading arrangements. We are working to agree arrangements with those partner countries to replicate, as far as possible, the effects of these agreements.

Brexit: Commonwealth, Trade and Migration

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Monday 13th March 2017 Lords Chamber

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UKIP)]

My Lords—

[The Lord Privy Seal (Baroness Evans of Bowes Park) (Con)]

My Lords, we will hear from the UKIP representative.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch]

My Lords, do the Government agree that the EU single market will continue in long-term and irreversible decline, whereas the Commonwealth contains many of the markets of the future?

Informal European Council

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Monday 6th February 2017 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

As I was not in the room when President Trump and the Prime Minister had a conversation, I cannot give the noble Baroness a verbatim account. However, I can tell her what the Prime Minister has told us: that President Trump confirmed that he was 100% behind NATO. I believe that he nodded and agreed with that when he was standing at his podium. However, I am afraid that I was not there any more than she was.

As I have said, I cannot say any more about the situation regarding the status of EU nationals. We have been very clear that this is a priority for us and that we want to come to an agreement as quickly as possible. However, we also have to respect the position of our EU partners. We will try to address this issue very quickly. The Prime Minister has been extremely clear, as have I and all my Front Bench colleagues, that we hugely value the contribution of EU citizens here, and that this is a priority for us.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UKIP)]

My Lords, further to that point, the Statement says that the general view was that mutual recognition should take place. Which of the 27 member states do not agree with that? Is it not rather depressing that the Prime Minister has already made weeks ago an offer of mutual recognition for their 3.5 million-plus people living here and our 1.2 million people living there? Is it not very disappointing that they have not already agreed that? On the question of NATO, could the noble Baroness tell us which of the EU nations are actually refusing to pay their 2% of GDP? Is not President Trump quite right in insisting that they should?

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

As I have said, we believe there is good will on all sides to look at the status of both EU nationals in the UK and UK nationals in member states. We consider this a priority. We believe it is something on which we will have very constructive early discussions with our European partners. We have also said in relation to NATO—the Prime Minister discussed this over lunch—that we want to encourage other European leaders to deliver on their commitment to spend 2% of their GDP on defence. We believe that a number of European countries are actively considering that and will be looking to do it in due course.

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

As I said in the Statement, the Prime Minister discussed with our European partners the need to engage patiently and constructively with America as a friend and ally—an ally that has helped guarantee the longest period of peace Europe has known. Certainly we are and remain close partners on trade and security of defence. Also, as friends, where we have differences we need to be honest about them.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UKIP)]

Can I follow up the question from the noble Baroness, Lady Royall, and repeat a question that I have put to the Government many times since 1999? Does it matter if the European Union falls apart and the democratic nations of Europe go back to their own currencies, freely trading together and supporting NATO together and so on? What is the point of the European Union now? Why do we need it at all? Should we not be very grateful if it falls apart?

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

We are clear that we want to see a strong Europe and we want to have a strong partnership and relationship with Europe, but we will do it as a global and independent Britain.

Schools: Volunteer Reading Helpers

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Wednesday 11th January 2017 Lords Chamber

[Lord Storey (LD)]

My Lords—

[The Lord Privy Seal (Baroness Evans of Bowes Park) (Con)]

My Lords, we will hear from the UKIP representative.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch]

My Lords, I am more than usually grateful. Are the Government confident that our teacher training—which, after all, underlies our whole education system, at primary school and so on—is doing enough to teach future teachers to teach children how to read? For instance, can the Government confirm that the phonic method is now actively promoted, instead of being eschewed, as it was for many years?

Judicial Independence

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Wednesday 7th December 2016 Lords Chamber

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UKIP)]

My Lords—

[The Lord Privy Seal (Baroness Evans of Bowes Park) (Con)]

My Lords, it is the turn of the Cross Benches.

United Kingdom: Single Market

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Tuesday 15th November 2016 Lords Chamber

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UKIP)]

My Lords—

[The Lord Privy Seal (Baroness Evans of Bowes Park) (Con)]

My Lords, it is the turn of the Liberal Democrats.

Brexit

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Thursday 3rd November 2016 Lords Chamber

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UKIP)]

My Lords—

[The Lord Privy Seal (Baroness Evans of Bowes Park) (Con)]

My Lords, it is the turn of the Cross Benches.

Brexit: Article 50

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Wednesday 2nd November 2016 Lords Chamber

[The Lord Privy Seal (Baroness Evans of Bowes Park) (Con)]

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Pearson, has been attempting to get in. He will have a short question, then we will try to get a couple more questions in.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch]

My Lords, I am most grateful. Is not the founding idea behind the European Union precisely that it should have to deal not with unreliable national democracies and parliaments, but with only their Governments? Why should this change now for Brexit, upon which our sovereign people have spoken?

Brexit: Trade

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Tuesday 1st November 2016 Lords Chamber

[Lord Harrison (Lab)]

My Lords, will the Minister give an example of the elements of trade—

[The Lord Privy Seal (Baroness Evans of Bowes Park) (Con)]

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Pearson, has been trying to get in on a number of occasions, so we will go to him and then to the Labour Benches.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch]

I am most grateful, my Lords. Further to the penetrating question from my noble friend Lord Forsyth, could I ask the Government whether they are aware—

Brexit: Single Market

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Monday 24th October 2016 Lords Chamber

[The Lord Privy Seal (Baroness Evans of Bowes Park) (Con)]

My Lords, after a number of unsuccessful attempts, it is the turn of the noble Lord, Lord Pearson.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch]

My Lords, I am most grateful. Do the Government agree that the single market has prevented us doing our own free trade deals and has overregulated the 90% of our economy which does not trade with it? Therefore, is not continuing free trade all that we need and are we not likely to get it because the EU needs it so much more than we do—for instance, with 2 million more jobs making and selling things to us than we have selling things to it, and any new tariffs falling much more heavily on it than they would on us, as we saw from the Civitas report today?

Universities: Erasmus Programme

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Tuesday 12th July 2016 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

I can certainly assure the noble Baroness and the House that we take these matters seriously. My honourable friend the Minister for Universities and Science is in close contact with universities to make sure that their voice is heard. As a Government, we take the importance of foreign languages extremely seriously, which is why compulsory modern languages are part of the EBacc and why it is good news that modern language GSCE numbers have increased by 20% since 2010, while A-level entries have increased by nearly 4% since 2014. We are seeing improvements, which we want to continue, and are well aware of the importance of this issue.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UKIP)]

My Lords, do the Government accept that there is no such thing as EU aid to the United Kingdom because we send it some £20 billion a year gross, of which it sends back around half, or some £10 billion per annum? In other words, for every pound that it sends us we have sent it two. Surely that means that we have plenty in hand to go on funding this sort of programme and other worthy initiatives, if that is what our elected Government want to do?

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

What I can say is that EU and international students and academics play an important role in our universities, and our European neighbours are among some of our closest research partners. We want these relationships to continue, and we are doing what we can to give them the confidence we can in the short term. Everything else, I am afraid, is up for negotiation but I certainly reassure the House that we take these issues seriously and want our university sector to remain the world-class, leading international sector that it is.

Student Loans: Muslim Students

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Thursday 3rd March 2016 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

As I said, we will be looking for a suitable vehicle with which to attempt to introduce the system. There is strong interest in it: of the consultation responses, 94% believed that there would be demand for such a system and 81% thought that the proposed scheme being developed was acceptable. We of course want to ensure access for all students to higher education, which is why we would be the first Government to introduce such a scheme, but we need primary legislation to do so.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UKIP)]

My Lords, talking of the growing influence of sharia law in this country, is there any truth to the press reports that the Government have mortgaged Richmond House and other buildings with sharia bonds, which ban alcohol on those premises? If true, how would that affect the habits of Members of the House of Commons if they move into those premises during refurbishment of this Palace?

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

This proposed scheme has nothing to do with sharia law. It is about ensuring that all young people have access to university. We are very keen to try to ensure that we can provide a product that will help them to do so.

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

As I have said to noble Lords, the Government hope to introduce the system and will be looking at the appropriate legislative way to do so. As my noble friend says, the up-and-coming Session will be detailed in the Queen’s Speech in due course.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch]

My Lords, can the Minister explain the difference between takaful and paying interest?

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

As I said, this model operates as a mutual fund so the contributions that a student pays go into that fund to be refunded. The idea of borrowing and paying back interest is absent from this model.

Universities: Freedom of Speech

Debate between Lord Pearson of Rannoch and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

Monday 22nd February 2016 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

The noble Baroness is absolutely right. There is clear guidance to universities about their responsibilities to ensure free and open debate on campus and we will give full support to university leaderships to ensure that legitimate and open debate within the law can take place. It is concerning that we have seen a number of incidents, as the noble Baroness said. Part of the beauty of going to university is the ability to debate, to have your views challenged and to challenge others. We must continue to support all universities in making sure that all students continue to have that opportunity.

[Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UKIP)]

My Lords, do the Government agree that criticism and debate about our religions should be part of freedom of speech at our universities, and indeed elsewhere, but that the lawful line is crossed when adherents to those religions are insulted for their beliefs? Is it not that that becomes incitement?

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park]

Universities are uniquely placed to provide intellectual and robust challenge to narratives and they must continue to do this. Of course, students and academics have the right to protest peacefully but this cannot lead to intimidation, harassment or the silencing of those they disagree with. That must be stopped.