EU: Withdrawal and Future Relationship (Votes)

Graham P Jones Excerpts

Monday 1st April 2019 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. The only early indication I can give him is that I think it is reasonable, on the basis of what was passed earlier today in the business of the House motion, to suppose that the right hon. Member for West Dorset (Sir Oliver Letwin) will be carefully contemplating the intended procedure for Wednesday. Specifically, I think it is reasonable to expect that he will be looking to table a business of the House motion and, from that, the hon. Gentleman will gather what the right hon. Member for West Dorset has in mind.

Colleagues will be able to take a view about that. Moreover, just as colleagues have spoken to each other in recent days to bid for support for particular options, it is open to colleagues to communicate with each other about these matters before Wednesday, and I rather imagine that they will do so. Precisely what procedure is envisaged I cannot say, nor is it self-evident that there can be only one procedure proposed. There may well be a number of alternative ideas circulating in colleagues’ minds, and I cannot say more than that. We will have to see. [Interruption.] There is nothing very significant about that. I hear a knowing grunt from someone on the Treasury Bench as though something remarkably significant or suspicious has been said, but neither of those things is so.

[Graham P. Jones (Hyndburn) (Lab)]

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. To follow on from what my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell) said about the influence that you may have on the business of the House motion on Wednesday, we need now to be brutal about this. The Prime Minister’s deal was last defeated by 58 votes—that is the worst option, so that should get taken off the table. Are we going to have an eliminatory process? Common market 2.0 lost by 21 votes. A confirmatory ballot lost by 12 votes. Revocation lost by 11 votes. Clearly top of the table was the Father of the House’s motion on the customs union. Are we going to have a brutal process whereby we get to one outcome on Wednesday, and can you influence that? It needs to happen.

[Mr Speaker]

I do not cavil at the hon. Gentleman’s point, and I do not want him to think I am being pedantic, but I dislike the use of the word “brutal”. I am not in favour of brutality. I am in favour of clarity, of decisiveness and of resolution.

[Graham P. Jones]

I apologise for that.

[Mr Speaker]

The hon. Gentleman does not need to apologise. In so far as that requires some concentrated thinking, I agree. Some colleagues will be pleased with the outcome of tonight’s votes. [Interruption.] The hon. Member for Shipley (Philip Davies) is noisily yelling his approval of that observation, beaming as he stands by me. Other colleagues are disappointed. We are where we are. Nothing has won tonight.

In what do I take comfort? Well, Roger Federer put on a majestic masterclass in Miami last night. I am happy about that, and of course I am happy that, although nothing won tonight here in this Chamber, at the Emirates Arsenal won 2-0. I just have to content myself with that for tonight—I appreciate that Newcastle Members will not be so pleased—and we shall have to see what happens tomorrow. I am sorry that I cannot add to that, but I feel that colleagues have ventilated their points, and it is right that they should do so. I do not think we can advance matters further this evening, so I suggest that we look to get a decent night’s rest, recharge our batteries and try to do our duty with resolution but good humour tomorrow.

Oral Answers to Questions

Graham P Jones Excerpts

Thursday 15th March 2018 Commons Chamber

[Nic Dakin (Scunthorpe) (Lab)]

6. What discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on support for manufacturers after the UK leaves the EU.

[Graham P. Jones (Hyndburn) (Lab)]

15. What discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on support for manufacturers after the UK leaves the EU.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (Mr Steve Baker)]

This is, of course, a topic of frequent interest. Leaving the EU allows us to consider how our economy is shaped and presents an opportunity to deliver a pro-competitive, pro-innovation industrial strategy that builds on our strengths, provides certainty and stands the test of time, so that we have a resilient economy, ready for the future.

[Mr Baker]

This Government are very disappointed by the President’s intention to place tariffs on steel and aluminium. The UK fully supports open and free trade and measures to tackle unfair trade practices. As part of the preparations for the UK’s exit from the EU, we are committed to creating a trade remedies framework that is able to react efficiently and effectively. When the UK leaves the EU, we will remain a member of the World Trade Organisation. We will play a full part in promoting compliance with the rules-based trading system and, if necessary, make use of the WTO’s dispute resolution procedures in defence of our national interest—[Interruption.] The hon. Gentleman is barracking me from a sedentary position. I say to him that if we adopted Labour’s position, all our trade remedies would be the policies of the European Union and not of the United Kingdom.

[Graham P. Jones]

The chief executive of ADS— Mr Paul Everitt—which represents companies in the aerospace, defence, security and space sectors, has said:

“A customs union with the EU is a practical solution that would put businesses in the best possible position to compete after Brexit.”

If the Government care about manufacturing, will they reconsider their position on the customs union?

[Mr Baker]

Of course we are concerned about aerospace; it is one of our greatest industries. I remind the hon. Gentleman of what was said by his hon. Friend, the hon. Member for Brent North (Barry Gardiner). He said that retaining membership of a customs union would be “deeply unattractive”, because it would stop us negotiating our own trade deals:

“As a transitional phase, a customs union agreement might be thought to have some merit. However, as an end point it is deeply unattractive. It would preclude us from making our own independent trade agreements with our five largest export markets outside the EU”.

For all the hon. Member for Hyndburn (Graham P. Jones) says, his party is at sixes and sevens.

Oral Answers to Questions

Graham P Jones Excerpts

Thursday 26th January 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr David Jones]

My hon. Friend is right to highlight the importance of the two-way tourism industry in Europe. These are issues that we are considering, but I can assure him that our aim is for frictionless arrangements.

[Graham Jones (Hyndburn) (Lab)]

What settlement have the Government made with the Crown dependencies in their relationship with the EU via protocol 3? When we exit the European Union, does it mean that the Crown dependencies will also exit the customs union?

[Mr Robin Walker]

I met the Chief Ministers of Crown dependencies only yesterday as part of a formal process of ongoing meetings that we are holding to take their views into account. Following the Prime Minister’s speech, I also spoke to each Chief Minister, and they are very pleased with our direction of travel.

Oral Answers to Questions

Graham P Jones Excerpts

Thursday 1st December 2016 Commons Chamber

[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.

[Graham Jones (Hyndburn) (Lab)]

T7. Can the Secretary of State say what the current tariff is for motor vehicles entering the European Union? If we do not get a trade deal, when will British car manufacturers start paying that tariff—what date?

[Mr David Jones]

Our intention is to seek the best possible access to the European market, and to provide similar access for Europeans to this market. That is the basis upon which we are approaching the negotiations.