Brexit

Baroness Smith of Basildon Excerpts

Wednesday 2nd October 2019 Lords Chamber

[Lord Robathan (Con)]

My Lords, so after three and a quarter years, here we are again discussing Brexit. Actually, there are one or two new things to be discussed, such as this proposal that we have just heard and that the noble Lord, Lord Empey, has been talking about, but basically, there is nothing much that is new. The old arguments have been trotted out, so I will not disappoint the House and will repeat one or two.

Those who voted for a referendum, which I did not, who voted to implement Article 50, who stood on manifestos in 2017 promising to implement the results—

“no deal is better than a bad deal”,

it said in the Conservative Party manifesto—who promised to accept the result at the very beginning shame themselves by their obstructionism. I particularly single out the Liberal Democrats, although it is sad that there are only three here to listen.

[Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)]

There are only four on your Benches.

[Lord Robathan]

There are only three Liberal Democrats here to listen to me. These people have avoided listening to me, but they went on for years about how they were campaigning for “a real referendum” on Europe, under Nick Clegg. Paddy Ashdown boasted that he called for a referendum on Europe in 1989 or 1990. Let me quote the late Paddy Ashdown:

“I will forgive no one who does not accept the sovereign voice of the British people … whether it’s by one percent or 20 percent”.


That was on the day of the referendum. Now, the Liberal Democrats have decided, “We will ignore the British people, ignore what they said, because we know better”, notwithstanding 10 years of campaigning for a referendum.

Why have we been called back? While we are here for a total of seven or eight days, we at least are discussing Brexit. Down the other end, an empty House of Commons has been discussing the Domestic Abuse Bill—a very important measure.

[Baroness Smith of Basildon]

The noble Lord says that it is an important measure, but he seems to be critical of what the House of Commons was discussing. I think he ought to be very careful where he goes with this.