Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Davis and Philip Hollobone

Thursday 14th June 2018 Commons Chamber

[Mr David Davis]

The hon. Gentleman really must learn to pay attention during these questions. The simple truth is that creating such an incentive for the European Union would actually be the one thing that undermined the negotiations.

[Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)]

In any divorce, the assets are divided. Including the £39 billion divorce bill, from the day we joined in 1973 to the day we leave, we will have given £250 billion in today’s money to this organisation. What proportion of the assets are we going to get back?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Davis and Philip Hollobone

Thursday 15th March 2018 Commons Chamber

[Mr Hollobone]

Does the promotion of leaker-in-chief and Brexit-phobic Martin Selmayr to the EU’s top civil service post help or hinder our stance, or make no difference at all?

[Mr David Davis]

As a matter of diplomatic policy, we never comment on internal operations in other Governments.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Davis and Philip Hollobone

Thursday 14th December 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

The implementation period will be most valuable if companies know what the final outcome will be, because that will allow them to prepare for it. To that end, we will seek to conclude the substantive portion of the negotiation before then.

[Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)]

There is talk of a two-year implementation or transition period. What is there to prevent that from simply being a two-year extension of our membership of the European Union?

[Mr Davis]

One reason is that, if we stayed in the European Union completely, we would still be subject to the duty of sincere co-operation, which is what constrains us from carrying out free trade negotiations. That is one reason, at least, why we would not do that.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Davis and Philip Hollobone

Thursday 2nd November 2017 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (Mr David Davis)]

Article 50 of the treaty on European Union stipulates that the final withdrawal agreement should be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament. The European Parliament is entitled to a straight yes or no vote. It does not have the power to amend the withdrawal agreement between the UK and the EU. As the Prime Minister has said, we are confident that we will be able to conclude the negotiations and agreement in time to honour the voting commitments made in our Parliament and in the European Parliament. We do not approach these negotiations expecting failure; we are expecting success.

[Mr Hollobone]

Given that crazed Europhile MEPs such as Guy Verhofstadt are seeking to punish the United Kingdom for daring to vote to leave the European Union, and given that these same people are under the deluded impression that no deal would actually be worse for the UK than a bad deal, it seems likely that the European Parliament will seek to veto any such agreement. Should we not therefore redouble our efforts to prepare for a no-deal situation?

[Mr Davis]

The last time I used the phrase “Get thee behind me, Satan” in answer to a question about Guy Verhofstadt, he thought that I was calling him Satan, so I will stay off that one. Of course the European Parliament is very enthused about the institutions of the European Union, but when it comes to this vote, the deal that we have agreed with the European Union will be clear, and MEPs will have to reflect on their responsibilities to their constituents in their own countries. What he and I have always agreed is that the best outcome for everybody is a free trade arrangement that will help not just us but Holland, France, Germany and all the other 27 member states.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)]

There have been reports that senior current and former parliamentary figures have been engaged in private discussions with the EU’s chief negotiator and that some of those individuals are members of Her Majesty’s Privy Council. In the interests of transparency, have transcripts of those meetings been made available, and does the Secretary of State regard such extra parliamentary activity as helpful or a hindrance to the UK’s national interest?

[Mr David Davis]

There are no such records. As for helpful or a hindrance, let us say that it adds to the gaiety of nations.

Leaving the EU: Parliamentary Vote

Debate between David Davis and Philip Hollobone

Thursday 26th October 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

The right hon. Gentleman’s party’s policy is for a second referendum, and I do not think that any other party in the House believes in that.

[Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)]

There was a meaningful vote. It was in June 2016. On a 78% turnout, 61% of voters in Kettering voted to leave. People in Kettering are honest, straightforward and plain-speaking. Will the Secretary of State reassure them that we are leaving the European Union in March 2019?

[Mr Davis]

Yes. My task is to respect that vote because, as my hon. Friend said, it is the biggest mandate given to a modern Government. It is also my task to deliver the best deal possible—which means a deal, not no deal—respecting that vote.

EU Exit Negotiations

Debate between David Davis and Philip Hollobone

Tuesday 5th September 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

No, but a country does not have to be a member of that to sell and buy from it, just as many other countries do.

[Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)]

Has it not become depressingly clear this afternoon that, with some honourable exceptions, most Opposition MPs have swallowed the EU negotiating line hook, line and sinker? They want us to transition to staying in the single market and the customs union, and if possible to staying in the whole EU, thus preventing us from regaining control of our borders, and they are displaying a catastrophic loss of nerve at the first whiff of grapeshot from the European Commission. May I commend my right hon. Friend for his cool head and his steady nerve, and may I urge him to hold the line and not to listen to the remoaners who have become reversers who would sell our country short?

[Mr Davis]

I thank my hon. Friend for the compliment, but all I will say is that I do not think the grapeshot has started yet.

Article 50

Debate between David Davis and Philip Hollobone

Tuesday 24th January 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

On the latter point, I do not have that number in my mind, but I can—[Hon. Members: “Oh!”] Well, I don’t. I have been studying the judgment today. I will provide the hon. Lady with that number as soon as I can. That will happen quickly. I am quite sure that the Supreme Court judgment will have been expensive on one level, because lawyers are expensive, as the Labour spokesman would tell us. I am sure that he is a much more expensive lawyer—that is the greatest compliment I can pay him.

To make a more fundamental point, when we are dealing with something as important as this—I do not think anybody in the House questions the importance of the constitutional decision that has been made today—it is incredibly important that it is done on solid ground, with proper authority and in a way that the Government can interpret properly to deliver the right outcome. I have made that point across this Dispatch Box more than once. Frankly, it will therefore be worth whatever we have paid for it.

[Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)]

I commend my right hon. Friend for being the right man in the right place at the right time. Sixty-one per cent of the people of Kettering voted to leave the European Union. They will take comfort that there is nothing in today’s judgment that will delay the process, and they will like the fact that their Member of Parliament will obey their instructions and vote to trigger article 50. I commend it to all other Members to do the same.

[Mr Davis]

I thank my hon. Friend for that. All I can say is that I am surprised it was only 61% in his constituency.

Article 50

Debate between David Davis and Philip Hollobone

Monday 7th November 2016 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

I really like the right hon. Gentleman. I am a great admirer of him and what he has done in his life. I will say this to him: we have made a great deal of information available one way or another and we are going to make more available. The simple truth is that nobody on the Labour Benches appears to recognise that serious decisions are being taken in the public domain. They just do not like them.

[Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)]

Who will be leading the Government’s case to the Supreme Court? Will it be the Secretary of State, the Attorney General or the Prime Minister? Or can we expect all three?

[Mr Davis]

I think the taxpayer would have really good cause to worry if I was leading it. [Laughter.] We have a very good legal team. I suspect it will be the same brilliant legal team next time.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between David Davis and Philip Hollobone

Thursday 20th October 2016 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

I do not comment on leaks. I am not going to comment on that newspaper report or, indeed, on its veracity or otherwise. On the accountability of Government activity, I said during last week’s debate that I want to be as accountable and open as possible with the House of Commons, but the Labour party accepted enthusiastically the amendment to the motion, which said that we would do nothing to undermine or prejudge our negotiating position, and that is what we will do.

[Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)]

Rather disgracefully, the Treasury did its best to play a prominent role in the remain campaign, including the release of a highly dodgy dossier predicting economic doom and gloom. Is my right hon. Friend confident that the Treasury has now caught up with the result of the referendum and that it is singing from the same page as his Department?

[Mr Davis]

I am afraid that I do not agree with my hon. Friend. The simple truth is that the Treasury is looking at all the options, just as we are. Forecasts of the sorts that he described are contingent entirely on the assumptions that are put under them. If a lot of deleterious assumptions are made, they will result in a deleterious outcome. If serious policies are introduced to correct any of the risks and maximise the opportunities, they will result in a very much better outcome, and that is what we will do.

Next Steps in Leaving the European Union

Debate between David Davis and Philip Hollobone

Monday 10th October 2016 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

Yet again, the hon. Gentleman has missed the point. We have already instructed the Student Loans Company to underpin loans for foreign students to 2016-17. That is an action designed to help students to get here, not the opposite.

[Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)]

Is it not the truth that the depreciation of sterling since 23 June has provided a massive boost to Britain’s international competitiveness and has been great news for British exporters? Has my right hon. Friend been encouraged or discouraged by the number of countries knocking on our door, willing to make free trade agreements when we leave the European Union?

[Mr Davis]

One of the interesting things today has been the willingness of the Opposition to carp on the downside of every single aspect of Brexit. The simple truth is that those who are talking about the competitiveness of their own industries are not paying attention to the level of the pound. While it has some downsides, it certainly has a very large number of upsides.

Exiting the European Union

Debate between David Davis and Philip Hollobone

Monday 5th September 2016 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

I will draw the hon. Gentleman’s request to the attention of the Chancellor.

[Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)]

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his well-deserved appointment. Some 61% of the people of Kettering voted to leave the European Union and they want to make sure that my right hon. Friend has the tools to finish the job. Following the question about staff numbers from my hon. Friend the Member for Selby and Ainsty (Nigel Adams), the Secretary of State says that he has 180 people at the moment, but how many does he need? Given that his Department will hopefully no longer exist in two years’ time, what incentive is there for the brightest and best civil servants, who will have long-term civil service careers in mind, to join his Department; and what incentives are there to attract people from the private sector?

[Mr Davis]

The first thing about incentives—we barely need them—is that people will want to be at the centre of the most important historic change that has happened over the last two or three decades. I do not think that will be a problem. Arrangements are being made, precisely because we will disappear when the process is over, to ensure continuity and to ensure that they will go back seamlessly into the Whitehall system. I rather suspect that, at the end, there will be lots more bids for them than that.