Asked by: Caroline Lucas (Green Party - Brighton, Pavilion)
Question to the Department for Exiting the European Union :
To ask the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of his Department paying the £65 application fee for settled or pre-settled status for EU nationals (a) employed by and (b) working as an outsourced worker in his Department; what estimate he has made of the total cost to his Department of paying those fees; and what assessment he has made of the risks that the EU Settlement Scheme poses to the retention of EU nationals (i) employed by or (ii) working as an outsourced worker in his Department.
Answered by Robin Walker
The UK Government currently does not plan to pay the Settled Status Fee for its non-UK EU citizen employees. The fee is set at an affordable rate (£65), less than the cost of a UK passport. Outsourced workers are not employees of the Department and therefore this would be a decision for their employers.
The number of non-UK EU citizens employed across the Civil Service is not consistently collected across Government. It is therefore not possible to estimate the cost of paying the settled status fee for non-UK EU nationals employed directly by the department.
We value the significant contribution made by EU citizens working in the Civil Service and we want these colleagues to continue to play a full role in the work of the Civil Service. We are committed to supporting our EU citizen employees across the Civil Service; the important engagement with EU national networks across government will continue over the coming months.
The Government has confirmed that, in a no deal scenario, the EU Settlement Scheme will continue to be implemented, enabling EU citizens and their family members living in the UK by 29 March 2019 to secure their status and continue to be able to work, study, and access benefits and services in the UK. The scheme will be fully open by 30 March 2019 as planned.
Asked by: Caroline Lucas (Green Party - Brighton, Pavilion)
Question to the Department for Exiting the European Union :
To ask the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, what progress the cross-Whitehall workstream has made since January 2018 on realising the opportunities to regulate (a) social, (b) environmental, (c) energy, (d) consumer and (e) product standards differently after the UK leaves the EU; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Suella Braverman
The Government is undertaking a wide range of analysis that contributes to our exit negotiations with the EU.
It is not standard practice to provide a running commentary on continuing, internal analysis. Ministers have a specific responsibility, which Parliament has endorsed, not to release information that could reveal our negotiating position.
Asked by: Caroline Lucas (Green Party - Brighton, Pavilion)
Question to the Department for Exiting the European Union :
To ask the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, with reference to the document EU Exit Analysis Cross Whitehall Briefing, dated January 2018, what assumptions were made when modelling for the impact on gross value added in the agriculture sector of exiting the EU under a Free Trade Agreement scenario.
Answered by Robin Walker
Leaving the European Union means leaving the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). We now want to take the opportunities leaving brings to reform the UK’s agricultural policy and ensure we make the most of these for our farmers and exporters.
The document to which the Honourable Member’s question refers is preliminary draft analysis and does not represent Government policy. As Ministers clearly set out in the House, this is provisional and incomplete internal work, part of a broad ongoing programme of analysis, and further work is in train.
It is analysis of existing trade relationships - none of which is the outcome we are working towards. As the Prime Minister has made clear, we are seeking the broadest and deepest possible partnership with the EU – covering more sectors and co-operating more fully than any Free Trade Agreement anywhere in the world today.