European Union: UK Membership

Andrew Snowden Excerpts

Monday 24th March 2025 Westminster Hall

[Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Sir John.

I thank the hon. Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for leading the debate on behalf of the Petitions Committee, and I thank all other Members who contributed. Although we have heard some valuable and considered contributions, the debate has, at times, felt like a display of the patronising remainer echo chamber: “We know best,” “If only they had listened to all of our selectively picked stats,” and, “Brexiteers didn’t know what they were voting for.” Indeed, we heard sniggering when the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) set out in an intervention the kind of Brexit that he believed in.

Brexiteers have been insulted, being compared with weirdos, or even those who assault other people on a night out—I thought that was a bit of a rich and testing comparison for a Labour Member to make, given the party’s own troubles on that front. Come on—this has even been blamed on Russia. Having listened to today’s contributions, I do not think that many of the arch-remainer MPs have learned much about why they lost the referendum in the first place.

We can all remember where we were when we found out the result of the referendum. In my case, having delayed a mini-break with my wife to the Lake district so that I could spend 23 June 2016 campaigning for Vote Leave, I decided once we arrived at our hotel that it would test Mrs Snowden’s generous patience and forgiveness if I spent the night and early hours watching the results come in. It was early the following morning when—to the annoyance of the other guests, I am sure—I woke up and shouted in jubilation as I found out we had voted to leave the European Union.

I accept that although that was a day of celebration for many, for others it was a day of disappointment and even anger. However, the verdict issued by the British public on that day was a final and binding decision, backed up with a confirmatory vote in 2019 when the Conservatives achieved a crystal-clear mandate to “Get Brexit Done”.

[James MacCleary]

Will the hon. Member give way?

[Mr Snowden]

No, we are low on time.

Since 2020, we have seen the benefits of an independent Britain. The European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020 gave us freedoms over our borders, waters and money while offering the UK the chance to regulate and legislate in our own national interest. We are no longer bound by the free movement of people obligation that came with membership, which gives us a much stronger say over who can and cannot enter this country legally.

We departed the common fisheries policy, meaning that for the first time since 1973, we had sovereignty over our own waters. The Conservative Government used our new fiscal policy freedoms to cut VAT across a range of consumer products and to establish a number of freeports, stimulating growth in all the nations and regions of the UK.

Most obviously, our economic independence from the European Union has provided significant opportunity for tailored deals, helping to build British business and our wider economy. Under the last Conservative Government, 73 separate trade deals were secured alongside a deal with the EU. That will continue to happen only if we acknowledge and appreciate the strong democratic mandate we were given, and the opportunities we secured as a result, but it is starting to look like the current Government have little interest in promoting the successes of our independence and are unprepared to hold negotiations with the EU from a position of strength.

Just last week, the German ambassador told the British Chambers of Commerce that for Germany, as least, this Government’s so-called reset with the EU is an opportunity for us to join the customs union. Will the Minister make it clear that that will not be a consideration in any future negotiations?

We know that Brussels is committed to demanding that the UK surrenders its new-found fishing rights and controls, leaving our waters at the mercy of French trawlers and our fishing industry at serious risk. I ask the Minister, very clearly: is that surrender on the table or not? While she is here, can she confirm whether a youth mobility scheme is off the table? If it is, what has she been told by our European counterparts about their position? From what we know, the European Commission has made that a central demand. Today we have seen further reporting that the Government are set to cancel the single trade window. Will the Minister confirm that that will not lead to deeper EU-UK regulatory alignment in its place?

So far the Government have shown an inability to clarify and solidify their position on any of those issues and have been remarkably opaque about the form and content of discussions with EU counterparts. We Conservatives have been very clear and set out five tests that we hope the Government will take up to ensure that we protect our independence from the European Union and the successes, past and future, resulting from it. Will the Minister commit today that there will be no backsliding on free movement or compulsory asylum transfers; that the UK will not allow any new money to be paid to the EU; that there will be no reduction in our fishing rights; that there will be no new rule taking, dynamic alignment or European Court jurisdiction for the UK; and that there will be no compromise on the primacy of NATO as the cornerstone of European security? Those are our tests for acceptable engagement. If the Government remain within them, they will have our support.

The UK must pursue its own interests, working with our European partners but not captive to purely their interests. Ultimately, the Government must respect the will of the British public, who voted to leave the European Union.

Oral Answers to Questions

Andrew Snowden Excerpts

Wednesday 12th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I join the hon. Lady in wishing everybody celebrating a very happy St Patrick’s day. She is right that we need a strong and settled relationship between the United Kingdom and Ireland, and the need for that has never been greater. That is why I was delighted to host the Taoiseach in Liverpool last week at our first annual UK-Ireland summit. We have turned the page and started a new era in our relationship with Ireland. I would be happy to go to Belfast in 2027, but I want to go much sooner than that.

[Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)]

Q3. In just 20 days’ time, new sentencing guidance will come into effect that the Justice Secretary has already conceded will be two-tier in its nature. It will mean that the colour of a person’s skin or their religion can mean that they are viewed with leniency in the eyes of the law. It will plunge public confidence in the judiciary into crisis, but it is avoidable. We Conservatives have tabled a Bill that, if backed on Friday, can stop this guidance in its tracks. Will the Prime Minister overrule his Justice Secretary, and confirm here and now that he will back that Bill, or will he simply step aside and prove that he has been two-tier Keir all along?

[The Prime Minister]

Everyone should be equal before the law, and that is why the Lord Chancellor has taken up the issue with the Sentencing Council, but the hon. Gentleman needs to do his homework. The proposal that he complains about was drafted in 2024, and the last Government were consulted. When they were consulted, what did they say? They said they welcomed the proposal. I understand that the shadow Justice Secretary, the right hon. Member for Newark (Robert Jenrick), is taking the Sentencing Council to court. Perhaps he should add himself as a second defendant, so that he can get to the bottom of all this.

Storm Éowyn

Andrew Snowden Excerpts

Monday 27th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Pat McFadden]

I can certainly confirm that the risk of flooding and extreme weather events will be covered in the review. It is important that we publish a national risk register that is updated constantly: we published our latest version just 10 days ago. As climate changes—and, indeed, as terrorism and other threats change—it is especially important, when we are considering resilience and how we should prepare and protect the country, that we are not caught in the past but look to the way in which the world is changing.

[Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)]

I echo the tributes to the emergency services and all those who have been out trying to keep people safe. It is particularly poignant for all of us on the Fylde coast who, each year, mark our police officers who have lost their lives rescuing people during stormy conditions. Two things are noticeable to those who visit Fylde: it is beautiful, and it is very flat. As it is a coastal constituency, that means that during storms, the wind reaches particularly high levels, while the water that is trying to get into the sea from the hillier parts of Lancashire slows down and does not leave the area so quickly, making it more prone to flooding.

I met representatives of the Environment Agency on Friday to discuss these issues in the midst of the storm. One problem concerns the pumping station at Lytham, which, like many others, has a funding allocation to pump water out to the river system when there is an immediate threat to life or residences but not necessarily when water is already backlogging on to farm and agricultural land across the area, which will cause further risks if that then creates a breach. May I ask two very brief questions? First, will there be a review of that funding from the Environment Agency. Can the Minister confirm the timelines for that? Secondly, when will the sustainable drainage systems legislation come into force?

[Pat McFadden]

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman’s constituency is beautiful and flat, and he is right to pay tribute to it. As for the funding for pumping stations or anything else, of course we want the right resources to be there, but I must gently say to Opposition Members that if they are going to call for more funding for things, they will have to support the revenue-raising measures that enable the Government to provide it. We cannot have a situation in which Members oppose every revenue-raising measure and then call for more funding in response to every statement.

Oral Answers to Questions

Andrew Snowden Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd January 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Prime Minister]

I thank my hon. Friend, because the achievements of hard-working staff at Huddersfield royal infirmary prove that we can bring down waiting times through our plans for change. It is important that we are applying that best practice and innovation across the NHS. We must do more. We inherited record waiting lists and we are now bringing them down.

[Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)]

In what is supposed to be a honeymoon period for a new Government, the Prime Minister has sacked his chief of staff, forced his City Minister and his Transport Secretary to resign, while No. 10 has been briefing against the Pensions Secretary, the Home Secretary and the Education Secretary. Is it not time that the Prime Minister accepts that the root causes at the heart of his Government are with him, not them?

[The Prime Minister]

We have just won a landslide victory and we have massive majority. We are getting on with the job—[Interruption.] Look at the sheer number of Ministers that the Conservatives got through on a yearly basis, causing instability in every conceivable Department.

House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill

Andrew Snowden Excerpts

Committee of the whole House
Tuesday 12th November 2024 Commons Chamber

[Phil Brickell]

I admire the right hon. Member’s penchant for House of Lords reform, but I will come to these points later, if I may.

The consequences of not acting are no less than existential when it comes to trust in our politics, in this place and in the other House. Trust in politics is at an all-time low, which is a legacy of 14 years of cronyism and corruption from the party opposite. Indeed, polling conducted by the UK Anti-Corruption Coalition earlier this year—[Interruption.] I think that if the hon. Member for West Suffolk (Nick Timothy) listens to what I have to say, he will reflect on it. Two thirds of respondents—two thirds—felt the UK was getting more corrupt, and in 2023 only 12% of respondents told the Office for National Statistics that they trusted political parties. It all adds up. Turnout in July was 60%, the second lowest in a UK election since 1885. At a time when autocratic hostile states seek to undermine us at every turn, democratic engagement has rarely been so important.

I believe that that this Bill is a small but important step towards restoring that trust, as my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister promised we would do during the election campaign. The Committee will also note what I very much hope are the impending appointments of an ethics and integrity commissioner, an anti-corruption champion and a covid corruption commissioner. Those are all vital measures, alongside the Bill, to improve standards and increase accountability. I urge the Government to confirm those appointments as soon as possible. They are further steps towards showing the country that it is vital to regain trust in politics as a means of improving lives for all.

[Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)]

The point about trust in politics is valid, and the hon. Member’s statistics showing a deterioration in that trust over the last couple of decades are probably something for all of us in this Chamber to reflect on, notably the politicians who are newest to the House. I am not sure how hereditary peers, who have been serving for decades, since the time when trust in politics was far higher, are to blame for the modern lack of trust. That is more for those in this House to consider, especially newer Members, rather than people who have given lifelong and diligent service in the other place.

[Phil Brickell]

I thank the hon. Member for his contribution. Hereditary peers are there by dint of birth, not by dint of their service or contribution to public life. He talks about decades of service, which may accrue over a period of time, but that is merely by dint of birth. We will shortly come to appointments to the other place, which touches on the point about accountability and trust.

I want to talk about the various amendments tabled by the right hon. Member for Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge (Sir Gavin Williamson). As colleagues have said, it is a great shame that he did not discover that he had such a penchant for reform and modernisation during his 14 years as a Member of the governing party.

Covid-19 Inquiry

Andrew Snowden Excerpts

Friday 19th July 2024 Commons Chamber

[Pat McFadden]

One of the things that Baroness Hallett advises in her report is that every three years there is a proper exercise to test any plan and see whether it is fit for purpose. That is an important recommendation to take away and consider. It is difficult to plan for every possible risk. This is not an easy thing to do, but it is really important to try to have the best possible systems in place between the centre of Government, between the Departments and, as we have said, between local authorities and the devolved Administrations too.

[Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)]

May I thank the right hon. Gentleman for the constructive way in which this has been approached, looking both at the things that went well and at the things we need to learn? Having external scrutiny from the covid inquiry provides that lens. As the Government look at the recommendations and begin to put plans in place, some of that will build on the work that was already being done and some, as he said, will be on things that need to improve. I suggest that external scrutiny of the Government’s response is equally important. Will he ask Lord Norton’s Statutory Inquiries Committee to monitor the Government’s response to the covid inquiry?

[Pat McFadden]

Scrutiny is always good, and I am sure that what we do will be scrutinised. It is really important to have a proper dialogue with the public about these things, because it does no harm for us as citizens, and as Government Ministers, to have a conversation about resilience, about what we do in an emergency, and about we think about that. We do not want to frighten anybody, but it is a good thing to do, and it is a proper role for Government to have a good dialogue with the public about this.