UK-EU Common Understanding Negotiations

Al Pinkerton Excerpts

Wednesday 17th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)]

We welcome the Minister’s announcement. As a recovering academic—a distinction that I think I share with him—I have witnessed at first hand the impact of our exiting the Erasmus scheme on university student intake. Welcoming students from across the EU into our education institutions and giving our own students opportunities to study abroad have undeniably strengthened our education system, so after years of campaigning, the Liberal Democrats welcome the news that the UK is finally set to rejoin the Erasmus scheme in 2027. However—I am sure the Minister expected there to be a “however”—while this represents an important first step towards building a closer relationship with Europe, I urge him to go further and faster.

Beyond this fixed-term experience of Erasmus+, will the Government commit to a proper youth mobility scheme for the benefit of the next generation, and can he update the House on what progress has been made in such negotiations? How confident is he that our food, drink and sanitary and phytosanitary scheme will be agreed by 2026, and how long thereafter will it take to fully implement the scheme? Agrifood and horticultural businesses cannot afford any further delays.

Finally, on the subject of unnecessary barriers to trade—which is where the Minister began his statement—will his Department commit itself at the very least to conducting a transparent assessment of the potential economic growth benefits of a UK-EU customs deal of the kind that the House voted for last week?

[Nick Thomas-Symonds]

We are aiming to conclude negotiations on the youth experience scheme by the next summit—which I see in the context of the 13 youth mobility schemes that already exist, many of them signed by the previous Government, although the Conservatives seem to have a collective amnesia about it nowadays—together with the linking of our emissions trading systems and the food and drink agreement. The hon. Gentleman asked me a direct question about the implementation of that agreement. I want to see it implemented by the first half of 2027, which will mean bringing a piece of legislation to Parliament in 2026 and then getting it through Parliament. I hope that, whatever our views may be, we will have support in doing that as quickly as possible in 2027.

Let me, for a moment, speak more broadly about Erasmus+—and, indeed, this applies to the youth experience scheme as well. I want both schemes to be open to people from all backgrounds across the United Kingdom. People often refer to Erasmus+ as a university exchange programme, and of course that is a vital part of it, but it is not just a university exchange programme; it is accessible across the country. I have been looking at, for example, the Welsh Government’s Taith programme, which has done an extremely good job with regard to accessibility. Where there is there are lessons to be learned from that, we will absolutely learn them.

Where I disagree with the hon. Gentleman is, of course, on the issue of the customs union, because the Government has only in recent days signed an additional free trade agreement with South Korea, and we also have the economic deal with the United States and the free trade deal with India. All those would have to be torn up if we went down the path that he has suggested.

Digital ID

Al Pinkerton Excerpts

Monday 8th December 2025 Westminster Hall

[James McMurdock (South Basildon and East Thurrock) (Ind)]

Thank you for saving me until last, Ms Furniss. With Christmas around the corner, the squats from bobbing will come in very handy.

The proposal to introduce digital ID represents one of the most significant changes to the relationship between the individual and the state in modern British history. The measure cannot be taken lightly; nor can it be brushed aside as a simple matter of convenience or administrative efficiency.

Britain already operates with a substantial set of identification systems—birth certificate, passport, driving licence, national insurance number, NHS number and the electoral register—none of which is optional in practice for law-abiding citizens. The Government’s own digital ID webpage confirms that none of those existing documents will be replaced by the new proposal, which creates a logical fallacy: if digital ID is optional and does not replace any of the existing documents, it cannot simplify the existing system.

It is also written in the very first paragraph of the digital ID webpage that the data held on digital ID will be limited to four pieces of information: name, date of birth, nationality or residency status, and a photograph. What does that tell us? It tells us that it is not a system really built to simplify domestic life; it is a system built to manage immigration status. Here we have another logical fallacy, because this does nothing to tackle the root cause of the immigration crisis, or anything to strengthen or enforce any of the right-to-work restrictions already in place.

I would add a third logical fallacy, which was somewhat innocently referred to earlier: if digital ID is optional, it can serve no purpose in a “papers, please” scenario. Thankfully, that is probably the better of the two scenarios, despite the cost of nearly £2 billion.

Britain operates on a simple democratic logic: we are born free, and the state may intrude only where necessary, proportionate and agreed by the public. Digital ID risks inverting that principle. I will point out that there was no mandate for this in the Labour manifesto.

[Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)]

The hon. Gentleman and I represent different political traditions, but I am glad to know that we are bound together by a shared sense of what a liberal society looks like. The only purpose of having an ID of this kind—a mandatory ID—is to enable people to ask for it. When we enable the conditions to be asked to prove our identity in society, we swiftly move from the freedoms he talks about to a permissions-based society, which should concern us all. Does he share that concern?

[James McMurdock]

That is a good point very well made, and it brings me to another point, which has not been raised in this debate: although the Government state that digital ID is optional—at least, at this stage—for the taxpayer, the cost is not optional. If they go ahead with it, we are all paying for it whether we like it or not, and whether we use it or not.

Even if the intentions today are benign, the power created has the potential to long outlive those who introduced it. I am of the view, therefore, that digital ID offers only the potential to inconvenience law-abiding citizens, while also creating the foundations for a powerful new mechanism capable of controlling banking, travel, property ownership, employment, public services, and daily activity into a single, state-managed system. Even if one trusted today’s Government, and many do not, no Government should ever have that level of centralised control over their citizens’ private lives.

The Government’s own website already suggests that digital ID would introduce access to social services, we have mission creep already, whether we like it or not. The digital ID webpage also states that the digital ID will be free. Of course, that is not entirely true, because the cost is £1.8 billion. In addition to the above we have the inevitable security risks and the fact that millions of people will struggle with digital access.

The Government talk liberal, but act authoritarian. Prison sentences for bad language and the proposal to reduce an eight-centuries-old right to jury trials are only two examples of this. Coupled with the digital ID white elephant, it paints an unpretty picture. I am against this measure.

Oral Answers to Questions

Al Pinkerton Excerpts

Thursday 4th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Andrew Cooper (Mid Cheshire) (Lab)]

11. What steps he is taking to improve relations with the EU.

[Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)]

16. What progress his Department has made on implementing the agreement made with the EU in May 2025.

[The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Darren Jones)]

Since coming to office, the Government have secured a new strategic partnership with the EU to deliver on jobs, bills and borders. We are repairing the damage inflicted by the Conservatives’ botched Brexit deal, which left food businesses paying £200 on paperwork for every single consignment shipped in from the EU. We have made significant progress since our historic May summit, including negotiations on a food and drink deal, which will slash red tape for businesses and bring down prices for consumers.

--- Later in debate ---

[Darren Jones]

I thank my hon. Friend for his important question. The United Kingdom remains committed to our role in European security in the face of rising threats. As the House will know, the Prime Minister has led the coalition of the willing to combat Vladimir Putin’s aggression in Ukraine and has worked tirelessly to strengthen our relationships with our allies, including across Europe. We are working quickly with the EU to implement our ambitious security and defence partnership, and have already stepped up our co-operation on key issues such as tackling hybrid threats and our collective support to Ukraine.

[Dr Pinkerton]

On “The News Agents” podcast yesterday evening, the Deputy Prime Minister, when asked about a UK-EU customs arrangement, said

“that journey of travel…is self-evident”.

Given that the botched Brexit deal is costing the UK Exchequer £90 billion a year, can I ask what that self-evident journey means for the Government’s own red lines? Will the Government take the opportunity to take a giant leap on that journey by supporting my ten-minute rule Bill next Tuesday?

[Darren Jones]

I have to confess that I have not listened to “The News Agents” podcast that the hon. Member refers to, but I know you will be pleased to hear, Mr Speaker, that what is self-evident is what is said in this House, not on podcasts. The Prime Minister was very clear yesterday on the position the Government hold in relation to a single market and a customs union, while also improving our trading and security relationships, which is what we will continue to deliver on.

Oral Answers to Questions

Al Pinkerton Excerpts

Wednesday 10th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

The previous Government shattered the dream of home ownership. We are reforming the outdated system so that leaseholders receive stronger rights, powers and protections. We will bring to an end the feudal leasehold system, reinvigorate commonhold and deliver the biggest boost to social affordable housing in a generation.

[Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)]

Since May, my constituent Sue has received thousands of pounds-worth of fines after a criminal gang in London cloned her number plate and went on a rampage through the capital. In an age of increasingly sophisticated digital security, the number registration system seems like a remarkably analogue anachronism—it is ripe for abuse and it is failing drivers. Will the Prime Minister look at and pick up my Vehicle Registration Marks (Misuse and Offences) Bill, which I presented last week, to strengthen the legislation and ensure that police services have the tools they require to tackle that growing crime and protect law-abiding motorists?

[The Prime Minister]

I am sorry to hear about the hon. Gentleman’s constituent. That is an awful situation for anyone to find themselves in. I will of course look at his Bill.

Oral Answers to Questions

Al Pinkerton Excerpts

Wednesday 26th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)]

Pharmacies in Northern Ireland are in a declared state of crisis. Pharmacists are having to dip into their savings just to stay afloat, and they are cutting staff numbers and opening hours. The National Pharmacy Association, which represents 6,500 community pharmacies, has warned that its members may have to further cut opening hours, halt home deliveries and reduce local support services, and that warning is amplified in Northern Ireland. What conversations has the Secretary of State had with the Northern Ireland Executive to safeguard access to crucial pharmacy services across rural and urban regions? Does he agree that an urgent impact assessment on pharmacy underfunding is required to highlight the scale of the crisis for community pharmacies, which provide vital-to-life services?

[Hilary Benn]

That issue did not figure in the discussions I had recently with the NI Health Minister, but I have no doubt that it will do so in the future, and I will take the matter up.

High Street Businesses

Al Pinkerton Excerpts

Wednesday 26th February 2025 Westminster Hall

[Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)]

I would thank you for calling me, Sir Desmond, but you have given me a real challenge. Nevertheless, it is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. I thank the hon. Member for Stockton West (Matt Vickers) for securing this important debate.

We all know that for generations, high streets have been at the heart of our communities—providing spaces for our local businesses to thrive, for social connections to flourish and for economic growth to be driven from the grassroots, yet across the United Kingdom, high streets are in decline. Businesses are closing at an alarming rate, there is crime and antisocial behaviour, depressing footfall, and outdated business rate systems stifling local enterprise.

In my constituency of Surrey Heath, we have numerous high streets across market towns and villages, all of which are interconnected to a larger ecosystem. Camberley, our historic market town, has struggled to grow over the past five years. Despite being just 28 miles from central London, the town centre is suffering from increased vacancy rates, crime, antisocial behaviour and public infrastructure that persistently fails to meet the needs and expectations of local businesses and residents.

Our high streets should be hubs of activity, but they have been undermined by the long-term absence of Government support and mounting economic pressures. One of the greatest challenges that I hear about from local businesses is related to the broken business rates system. In 2025-26, for example, despite paying business rates in excess of £30 million, businesses in Surrey Heath will see just £900,000 of their contributions re-invested into their local community, which is just 3% of the business rates raised. The vast majority of revenue raised through business rates is spirited away from the place of generation and collection by central Government.

Of course, that is not in any way unique to Surrey Heath. It is a national problem that discourages investment in our high street while allowing online retailers and large multinationals to operate under a significantly lighter tax burden. The Lib Dems have long argued that the business rate system is outdated, unfair and penalises bricks and mortar businesses, which are vital to our communities,

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

My hon Friend is making a fantastic speech. He will know the importance of pubs to our high streets, particularly in rural areas, to drive footfall and support our rural economies. I spoke to a tenant of a pub in Castle Cary who is trying to develop a community space for social and cultural cohesion, at a time when the town is growing quite significantly. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government’s proposed changes to business rates for properties with rateable values above £500,000 are potentially ruinous for many pubs on our high streets and in our rural villages?

[Dr Pinkerton]

I agree with that assessment. I have pubs in my patch that say exactly the same things to me. They are not in the same kind of more rurally sensitive communities that my hon. Friend refers to, but I fundamentally agree with her analysis. That is not a situation that is unique to Surrey Heath or to my hon Friend’s patch at all. I hope that the Government will commit to fundamental reform of that particular tax structure. Another issue that I am seeing in Surrey Heath is the growth of shoplifting and antisocial behaviour. It deters customers, it suppresses footfall and it makes it more difficult for businesses to operate and thrive.

In Camberley, our main market town, that is causing significant losses to businesses, and business owners tell me that they are tempted to move away from our community altogether because of the challenges they face. Police have issued dispersal orders across many market towns across this country, but I would like to ask the Secretary of State explicitly what assessment he has made as to the effectiveness of those particular measures. There should be far greater police visibility in our town centres to deter crime and to give businesses the encouragement and support that they need to thrive.

In conclusion, and because I only have a few seconds left, will the Minister say whether the Government have considered reforming business rates to ensure local communities retain more of the revenue generated by local high street businesses—as these communities expect to happen already? Also, what support is in place for high street businesses facing closure due to crime and antisocial behaviour?