Oral Answers to Questions

David Nuttall Excerpts

Thursday 27th April 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Jones]

It is very likely that the necessary competencies will be created to allow the devolved Assemblies themselves to make those statutory instruments.

[Mr David Nuttall (Bury North) (Con)]

Many have criticised the Government’s plans to make minor and technical changes to legislation using so-called Henry VIII powers, but this is in fact no more than plans to use delegated legislation. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the use of delegated legislation is actually an established part of the legislative procedures used in this House?

[Mr Jones]

Yes, my hon. Friend is entirely right. Any such statutory instruments would be made pursuant to statute, which would of course go through this House and the other place in the normal way.

Legislating for UK Withdrawal from the EU

David Nuttall Excerpts

Thursday 30th March 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr David Nuttall (Bury North) (Con)]

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the key point about the great repeal Bill is that the legal precedence of laws imposed on this country by the EU will end?

[Mr Davis]

Well, the legal precedence will not necessarily end, but the laws will be susceptible to our change. We will be able to change them both in our courts and in our Parliament.

Oral Answers to Questions

David Nuttall Excerpts

Thursday 9th March 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr David Nuttall (Bury North) (Con)]

Thanks to the new opportunities that will open up for the UK after we leave the EU, the accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers has said that the UK will have the fastest growing economy in the G7 over the next 30 years. Does my right hon. Friend agree that that demonstrates that manufacturing has nothing to fear from our leaving the EU?

[Mr Jones]

My hon. Friend is entirely right to point out that the naysayers and doom-mongers who said that the British economy would crash after we decided to leave the European Union have been proven wrong.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr David Davis]

Of course we do not want any doubt on the part of any citizen in Europe, British or otherwise, in Britain or on the continent. The simple truth is that most of the people I have seen in the decision-making tier, as it were, of European Governments agree with us: the issue of British citizens and European citizens has to be dealt with together, and will be dealt with as a matter of priority.

[Mr David Nuttall (Bury North) (Con)]

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the huge investment by Dyson in research and development facilities in the UK is a sign of confidence in the UK economy outside the EU?

[Mr David Jones]

Yes, it certainly is. That is only the latest in a long line of new investments in the British economy, showing the huge confidence that the international business community has in our country.

European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill

David Nuttall Excerpts

3rd reading: House of Commons & Committee: 3rd sitting: House of Commons & Report stage: House of Commons
Wednesday 8th February 2017 Commons Chamber

[Paul Blomfield]

No, I will not. I should respond to Mrs Laing’s appeal for us to make progress.

It has been suggested that the Government’s reservations about Euratom stem from the fact that the European Court of Justice is the regulatory body for the treaty. If that is so, their obsessional opposition to the Court of Justice leads them to want to rip up our membership of an organisation on which 21% of UK electricity generation relies and that supports a critical industry providing 78,000 jobs; that number is projected to rise to 110,000 by 2021. That membership led to us hosting the biggest nuclear fusion programme in the world in Culham.

[Mr David Nuttall (Bury North) (Con)]

rose—

[Paul Blomfield]

I will not give way, because I wish to make progress.

The organisation also helps to ensure nuclear safety. Before the Secretary of State leaves the Chamber, let me tell him that it would be helpful for the Government to explain their intentions. I will give way to him or to the Minister of State, Department for Exiting the European Union, because the people in this country deserve to know what is happening in relation to Euratom; people voting in Copeland in a couple of weeks’ time want to know, as their jobs are on the line. I give the Secretary of State or indeed the Minister the opportunity to intervene on me to make an unambiguous statement that it is the Government’s intention to remain in Euratom.

European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill

David Nuttall Excerpts

Tuesday 31st January 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Steve Baker (Wycombe) (Con)]

“God’s diplomacy”. My hon. Friend the Member for Fareham (Suella Fernandes) reminded us how Richard Cobden described free trade—and it is a description I very much wish I had had in mind last Friday, when I was asked rhetorically to describe free trade. The same person went on to ask me how, without taxation and redistribution in Europe, we would foster a culture of “diffused reciprocity”. After I had had a while to try to work out what that meant, I realised that I believe that trade is a far better way of showing people that we are co-dependent in this world—that we depend on one another for our livelihoods, our prosperity and our happiness—than tax and forced redistribution through systems that people barely understand. That, I think, is the crux of the matter, which has been touched on elsewhere in the debate.

In so far as the European Union does deliver free trade, it does so through political union. The pattern of free trade through political union and political power beyond democratic control has run its course. If any Member disagrees, I invite them to look at the hollowing out of the centre ground of politics right around the world and to ask themselves why it is not just populism and nationalism on the right that are on the rise, but why populism and harder left policies are arising in a number of countries.

The truth is that several factors are at work in our world at the moment that have delivered us into a profound crisis of political economy. On another occasion, I would be glad to set it out, but in the interests of time let me just say that our trade policy and the tendency to political centralisation is one of the key pillars that has caused the crisis. I think we need a new system of free trade—one that can deliver four things: free trade, self-government, fighting crony capitalism at home and defending against distortions if not predatory practice in countries overseas. If we can deliver those four things, I think we can reinvigorate faith in free trade—a faith generally held right across the House—among working people, who can see that free trade and worldwide co-operation on a fair basis, in which people are not undercut by state subsidies in far-off places, is in all our interests.

[Mr Nuttall]

Given how damaging uncertainty is to business and trade, does my hon. Friend agree that it would be in our national interest for the article 50 notice to be given as soon as possible?

[Mr Baker]

I do agree. Since we are having this debate and are passing, I hope, this Bill, I think the Prime Minister will be well equipped to get on with it swiftly.

The more I work in my capacity as chairman of the European research group with Legatum Institute Special Trade Commission, the more I realise that the four points I have described are highly realisable. The more the Government come to realise that, the more confident they will be to trigger article 50 early.

My second point is that we are here today, of course, to agree the principle of this Bill, and it is a simple principle—that we should confer on the Prime Minister the power to see through the referendum result. I consider myself blessed indeed that the Wycombe district voted remain. I say “blessed indeed” because, although my constituency covers only three fifths of the district, I am well aware that, given the position that I have held with my colleagues and the work that I am now doing, if I did not have that constant reminder that we must serve 100% of this country, it would be easy to be too “hard over” on the issues. We must listen to everyone and take account of their concerns, but we must also see through what is in the best interests of this country, and I believe that that is the complete fulfilment of the 12-point plan set out by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister.

In that context of fulfilling the wishes of the British public—the whole nation—I would say that all choices have consequences. The Lisbon treaty meant that the European Union constitution was booted through against the positive expressed wishes of populations. That drove me into politics, because I thought it important for power always to originate with the people. Similarly, I think that if the House were to refuse the passage of this Bill, we would suffer in this country a political implosion whose nature we can scarcely imagine.

Today, I believe, we can objectively say that only one party is capable of forming a stable Government, although I would prefer there to be two. I believe that if we were to go ahead and refuse to pass the Bill, even our own party would suffer grave consequences. It is in all our interests for it to be passed.

With that in mind, I should like briefly to defend the former Prime Minister, who has been described today—most unfairly, in my view—as reckless. I dare say, and I think that the record will bear it out, that I have done more than any other Conservative Member in the last year to organise opposition to David Cameron, and it is for that reason that I feel able to say that, in my experience, everything he did was motivated by the very highest concerns for this country. He needed to keep our party together so that it could survive a referendum that was necessary, and still be capable, as it is today, of being strong, united and determined to see through the best interests of the country.

Although we differed in the judgment, I am absolutely sure that David Cameron campaigned for remain because he believed that it was in the country’s interest. I believe that far from being reckless, as he was accused of being earlier, he served this country with profound decency, and, above all, with the pragmatic conservatism which—in his view—led him to campaign for remain in the best interests of the country. Of course I disagreed with him, and I am glad that we are where we are. If I have a lament, it is that he is no longer here—

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr David Nuttall (Bury North) (Con)]

The people have spoken. This House must now act accordingly.

Ordered, That the debate be now adjourned.—(Stephen Barclay.)

Debate to be resumed tomorrow.

Oral Answers to Questions

David Nuttall Excerpts

Thursday 26th January 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

The short answer is absolutely. The hon. Gentleman is right that the original clinical trials directive was a very poorly drafted piece of EU regulation that has certainly increased the burden of undertaking such trials and, if I remember correctly from my own constituency, particularly small trials. [Interruption.] Yes, and those are exactly the sort of people he is talking about. Their views will be taken very seriously in the new regime after leaving.

[Mr David Nuttall (Bury North) (Con)]

Since the referendum both the US biotech company Alnylam and GlaxoSmithKline have announced that they are making very substantial investments in the UK. Does my right hon. Friend agree that this demonstrates that, even after we leave the European Union, we will still be a very competitive place for biotech companies to do business?

[Mr Davis]

My hon. Friend is exactly right. I recently went to see some of those biotech companies in Cambridge, and one of the problems with people who talk the country down and talk these industries down is that they underestimate the extent to which pharmaceuticals, life sciences, finance and software are fantastically powerful British industries in which we already have a huge critical mass of talent, which will continue into the future.

Article 50

David Nuttall Excerpts

Tuesday 24th January 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

Because I have said that no component part of the United Kingdom has a veto. If the hon. Gentleman had been listening, he would know that I have said that dozens of times in this House.

[Mr David Nuttall (Bury North) (Con)]

Can my right hon. Friend reassure my Bury North constituents, a majority of whom voted to leave, that he will allow nothing to get in the way of ensuring that the Bill that he has announced will be passed as quickly as possible?

[Mr Davis]

Yes.

Oral Answers to Questions

David Nuttall Excerpts

Thursday 1st December 2016 Commons Chamber

[Mr David Davis]

That will be part of the great repeal Bill. If there is any amendment, I would think it would be done through primary legislation in the House.

[Mr David Nuttall (Bury North) (Con)]

T5. Does my right hon. Friend reject the advice of those calling for a second referendum and agree with me that seeking to reverse the decision that the people of the country made on 23 June serves only to undermine public trust in the House and in our democracy?

[The Minister of State, Department for Exiting the European Union (Mr David Jones)]

My hon. Friend is entirely right: there will be no second referendum.

Oral Answers to Questions

David Nuttall Excerpts

Thursday 20th October 2016 Commons Chamber

[Mr Jones]

No. Over the coming months the Government will consult all interested parties—including the devolved Administrations, who clearly have an interest in this policy—to ensure that future funding commitments represent value for money and are in line with our strategic priorities.

[Mr David Nuttall (Bury North) (Con)]

Does my right hon. Friend agree that one great advantage of the UK leaving the EU is that it will give us greater flexibility over how we spend our regional aid, and that as we will no longer be paying as a net contributor to the EU, we will have more money to spend on these schemes?

Next Steps in Leaving the European Union

David Nuttall Excerpts

Monday 10th October 2016 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

I really will not take any lectures about being careful with my words from that lot over there. These are the people who have talked the pound down time and again.

[Mr David Nuttall (Bury North) (Con)]

Can my right hon. Friend confirm that if the Bill to repeal the European Communities Act 1972 is blocked in the other place, the Government will not hesitate to use the provisions of the Parliament Acts to ensure that the Bill reaches the statute book?

[Mr Davis]

There is an old adage in politics about not answering hypothetical questions, and that is a hypothetical question. I do not expect the House of Lords to overturn the decision of the British people.