Jim Shannon
Main Page: Jim Shannon (Democratic Unionist Party - Strangford)Department Debates - View all Jim Shannon's debates with the Cabinet Office
(5 days, 4 hours ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for introducing this important debate, which proves the importance of the petition mechanism to the public for getting important issues debated in this place. Eight years ago, constituents in Macclesfield voted to remain part of the European Union. It was a referendum based on imperfect knowledge. It was called because of the internal politics of the Conservative party and in an attempt to see off the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) and his insistent Europhobe right—a group of people who would never be satisfied, as we subsequently discovered.
The context of calling that referendum was incredibly bizarre, as we had already been through the life-or-death experience of the Scottish referendum that put the UK’s constitutional future at stake. It was also called in the wake of the Russian annexation of Crimea, so it was a bizarre time to be holding a question on the fundamental membership of an important political and economic alliance. We know how that referendum developed: it was vitriolic, and undoubtedly influenced by the Russians. Just a few days before the vote, one of our colleagues was tragically murdered on the streets of the UK.
We can now clearly see the consequences of our decision, as Members have been pointing out expertly this afternoon. Some 14,000 of 100,000 firms surveyed by the London School of Economics have quit trading with the European Union altogether. Many small businesses in my constituency talk about the barriers, the red tape and the bureaucracy that other Members have mentioned.
The National Institute of Economic and Social Research points out that foreign direct investment has fallen 37%, and the OBR has said that the UK economy will be 4% smaller in 2035—that scary figure of the lost 4% is in all our minds—than it would have been had the UK stayed in the EU. That is a cumulative loss of hundreds of billions of pounds that we could be spending on our infrastructure, our public services and our collective defence.
As we went into the election last year, the Government ruled out rejoining the EU and reopening those constitutional questions in this Parliament. It was a manifesto that I stood on and that I am committed to. I understand some of the reasoning behind that, because although the debate will go on about that political choice, we must remember how painful the situation was immediately after the referendum—the business uncertainty and anxiety, the jobs that had been secure that were suddenly insecure, and the investment decisions that were cancelled. A Damoclean sword of unpredictability hung over us, so I understand the trepidation about reopening those questions.
The hon. Gentleman has set out clearly the concerns that many people have. I am a proud Brexiteer, but we did not get the Brexit that we voted for. Does he agree that the people of Northern Ireland are subject to all the same bureaucracy, high tariffs and cost factors that he has outlined? Does he share the concerns that I have as an MP from Northern Ireland for his constituents?
I thank the hon. Member for his intervention, but I think he has proved the point that I made, which is that the people who voted for Brexit were a group who would never be satisfied, because Brexit meant different things to different people. It was whatever illusion—whatever fantasy—people wanted it to be, which is why it was so dangerous to let that nationalist genie out of the bottle in the way that we did.
I welcome the Government’s effort to reset relations with the European Union, our neighbours and our allies, through a new forthcoming sanitary and phytosanitary agreement, supporting artists’ ability to tour in the EU, a mutual recognition agreement for professional qualifications, and a new UK-EU security pact. Those are all really important, but I note that we would have had them if we had continued to be members of the European Union.
I welcome the Government’s commitment to resetting those relationships, but as Members have said, let us go further. Let us look at the youth mobility scheme, let us join the pan-Euro-Mediterranean convention and ease barriers to trade, and let us lay the groundwork for a proper debate on where the future of this country should be.
I will talk even faster than I normally do. It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir John.
It is no secret that I am a Brexiteer. I voted to leave, and so did my constituency of Strangford—55% to 45%. The logic of some of the democrats in here is that Scotland voted to stay, Wales had its vote, England had its and Northern Ireland had its. But the vote was all of us taking a decision together. Whether we like democracy or not, that is the way it is.
I have been a politician for a great many years. I canvassed people and tried to encourage them to vote against the Belfast agreement. I fundamentally disagreed with allowing prisoners out of jail, with the disbanding of the Royal Ulster Constabulary and with the cloud that settled over the Ulster Defence Regiment. I absolutely opposed all those things with every sinew of my body, but I accepted the will of the people. The people said that is what they wanted, and I went ahead with that. I have worked within an institution that is fundamentally flawed, and the outworking of the concessions contained within a simple yes or no referendum has had lasting results. Fishing is vital to my constituency, and I hope the changes that the Government sought will benefit us in terms of quotas, jobs and opportunities.
I question the benefits of rejoining the EU. I could highlight the vile and repugnant way that the EU has used many constituents to hurt the UK for daring to leave. I could talk about the lack of seeds, packages of medication, chocolate biscuits and sausages, and the damage to our microbusinesses from EU regulations. I could talk about the fact that Northern Ireland is precluded from state aid, and the fact that we have restrictions but no representation. I could argue with anyone that the EU’s treatment of Northern Ireland as a whole indicates its rotten nature, but none of that really matters. I urge the Minister and the Labour Government not to give up our fishing rights. The UK voted to take them back, and the Government must respect and adhere to that.
I will conclude with this, ever mindful of what you told me, Sir John. The will of the people is all that matters, and they have spoken. Without another referendum, there can be no return, and in my opinion there should be no return. We are all democrats, elected through the democratic system, and we must keep that in mind. Democracy may not be palatable at times, but it has to be respected at all times. That is a full stop in any debate on this issue.