Withdrawal Agreement: Legal Position Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Attorney General

Withdrawal Agreement: Legal Position

Alex Chalk Excerpts
Monday 3rd December 2018

(5 years, 11 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Geoffrey Cox Portrait The Attorney General
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am afraid I cannot disclose the latter without committing the very sin that I am trying to prevent. Does the hon. Gentleman ask me whether I regret that? Let me be frank: yes, I do. We should have opposed the motion—of course we should have. We should have voted against it. All I can say is that if we had lost on a contested vote, we would be in exactly the same position as we are now in.

Alex Chalk Portrait Alex Chalk (Cheltenham) (Con)
- Hansard - -

If we found ourselves in the backstop, we might seek to argue that the European Union had not acted in good faith and had not used best endeavours. Who would appoint the body that would adjudicate on that dispute, and how could we be satisfied that we were going to get a fair hearing?

Geoffrey Cox Portrait The Attorney General
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The governance provisions, set out between articles 167 and 181, provide for 25 independent arbitrators, who are not members of any member state of the European Union or belong to the United Kingdom, to be appointed by both sides as a panel from which an arbitral tribunal can be selected. Ten are to be proposed by the United Kingdom and 10 by the European Union. Five chairmen are then to be proposed by each. If the parties are unable to agree, when a tribunal is formed two are appointed by the UK and two are appointed by the EU. Those four then choose the chairman. If they are unable to decide on a chairman, the permanent court of arbitration will appoint by lot.