EU Exit Negotiations

Debate between Mike Gapes and David Davis

Tuesday 5th December 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

Yes, my hon. Friend is right that in every European negotiation, that phrase, “nothing is agreed till everything is agreed” is a mantra, and it matters.

[Mike Gapes (Ilford South) (Lab/Co-op)]

Will the Secretary of State tell us the difference between regulatory convergence and regulatory alignment?

[Mr Davis]

One is about harmonisation; one is not.

EU Exit Negotiations

Debate between Mike Gapes and David Davis

Monday 13th November 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

My right hon. Friend is exactly right. By my count, if we include Bills already passed and Bills in prospect, we are looking at 10 pieces of primary legislation that Parliament can vote on, amend and, of course, comment on as a result of Brexit and in delivering Brexit.

[Mike Gapes (Ilford South) (Lab/Co-op)]

The Secretary of State says that any agreement will hold only if Parliament approves it, but he has also said that we will have no opportunity to vote if we have no agreement. That means, does it not, that all this talk about taking back control and giving our Parliament more powers is absolutely untrue? What we are faced with is a choice of putting a gun to our own head and blowing it off.

[Mr Davis]

Clearly the hon. Gentleman was not listening to my answer to the previous question. To deliver Brexit, this House will deal with at least 10 pieces of primary legislation. That is hardly denying Parliament a say in events.

EU Exit Negotiations

Debate between Mike Gapes and David Davis

Tuesday 17th October 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

There are two answers to my hon. Friend. First, we will try to get the nature of the implementation phase agreed as soon as possible so that, as the right hon. Member for Leeds Central (Hilary Benn) said, businesses can take it into account. Secondly, my hon. Friend is right that such a transition phase will be triggered only once we have completed the deal itself. We cannot carry on negotiating through it, because our negotiating position during a transition phase would not be very strong.

[Mike Gapes (Ilford South) (Lab/Co-op)]

The Secretary of State claimed that progress has been made on the questions of EU citizens here and British citizens living in other EU countries. Will he confirm that British citizens living in other EU countries will maintain the protections of the European Court of Justice for the foreseeable future, whether or not we are inside the EU?

[Mr Davis]

I am not sure that I heard the hon. Gentleman correctly. Did he ask about EU citizens here or UK citizens there?

[Mike Gapes]

UK citizens there.

[Mr Davis]

Yes, UK citizens in the EU will of course maintain the protection of the ECJ, because by being inside the EU they will be within the ECJ’s remit.

Brexit and Foreign Affairs

Debate between Mike Gapes and David Davis

Monday 26th June 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

No, not for the moment.

We intend to reach agreement on that issue as quickly as possible.

[Mike Gapes (Ilford South) (Lab/Co-op)]

Will the Secretary of State give way?

[Mr Mark Hendrick (Preston) (Lab/Co-op)]

Will the Secretary of State give way?

[Mr Davis]

I have given way quite a lot so far. I am going to be disciplined. No! I am practising being masterful.

Not everything in these negotiations will be easy. They will be complex, and I have no doubt that at times they will even be confrontational. However, I am convinced that both sides want to secure close co-operation and a deep new partnership.

[Mike Gapes]

Will the Secretary of State give way?

[Mr Davis]

No, not for the moment. In a moment.

Last year, in the referendum, we received a national instruction, which we will undertake in a way that serves the national interest. The instruction from the British people was for us to take back control of our borders, our money and our laws. Both the Conservative party and the Labour party campaigned on manifestos that promised to exit the European Union and end the free movement of people. Those two manifestos received more than 80% of the popular vote, so failing to deliver on that instruction is not an option for those of us who count ourselves as democrats. Ending the free movement of people means leaving the single market, as the EU has made abundantly clear to those who have cared to listen.

--- Later in debate ---

[Chris Bryant]

rose—

[Mr Davis]

I give way to the hon. Member for Ilford South (Mike Gapes).

[Mike Gapes]

The Secretary of State said that countries outside the European Union would not be directly within the remit of the European Court of Justice, but several countries outside the EU indirectly have arrangements with the European Union whereby the European Court of Justice or an equivalent body is established. Is that what the Secretary of State is aiming for?

[Mr Davis]

No. What the hon. Gentleman is describing is something like the Court of Justice of the European Free Trade Association States—the EFTA court—where there is a parallelism. That is not the aim. The aim is to have an independent arbitration arrangement, as is normal. For instance, the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement does exactly that. It has nominees from either side, and an independent chair. That is the sort of thing that we have in mind.

Legislating for UK Withdrawal from the EU

Debate between Mike Gapes and David Davis

Thursday 30th March 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

My hon. Friend is right and that is exactly why the Prime Minister made that a very important central piece of our policy.

[Mike Gapes (Ilford South) (Lab/Co-op)]

Yesterday, the Prime Minister did not mention the customs union in her statement and nor is it referred to in her letter to President Tusk. Paragraph 1.22 says that

“we will introduce a customs bill to establish a framework to implement a UK customs regime.”

Will the Secretary of State confirm that he intends to take us out of the customs union?

[Mr Davis]

Unusually for the hon. Gentleman, as an ex-Select Committee Chairman, he missed the fact that the Prime Minister made direct reference to the White Paper, which covers exactly that point.

Article 50

Debate between Mike Gapes and David Davis

Tuesday 24th January 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

I can send my hon. Friend the details, but the number of meetings is beyond counting; we have had meetings with manufacturing, aviation, tourism, finance and banking, insurance and so on. Not just my Ministers but Ministers across Government are talking to their own client industries, as it were, to ensure they know what their concerns are, what the opportunities are and what policy measures we have to take to maximise the opportunities and mitigate any concerns. It took a few months, but people are beginning to see the opportunities, rather than the concerns, which represents an incredibly important change in mood in our country.

[Mike Gapes (Ilford South) (Lab/Co-op)]

The Secretary of State has twice said that the point of no return was on 23 June, and he has ruled out a White Paper and a vote on the plan. Does he agree that neither the words “customs union” nor “single market” were on the ballot paper? If the House decides, at some point after article 50 has been triggered, that it does not wish to proceed with the process, would we leave automatically or is it reversible?

[Mr Davis]

First, I have listened to people talking about what was not on the ballot paper. It is rather like saying, “You said you were going to sell the car, but you didn’t say you were going to sell me the engine and tyres as well.” These elements—the common external tariff barrier, the common commercial policy, the role of the European Court of Justice, and so on—are components of the EU, which the public voted to leave. Secondly, the hon. Gentleman misquotes me. I have said that there will be any number of votes and debates in the coming two years, many of them about the issues he talks about.

Article 50

Debate between Mike Gapes and David Davis

Monday 7th November 2016 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

I have stated my view on the proper approach for the Government. That does not constrain Parliament at all.

[Mike Gapes (Ilford South) (Lab/Co-op)]

The Secretary of State has referred to the timetable for article 50. Once it is triggered, we have a maximum of two years. Does he agree that, if we do not have agreement towards the end of that period, we face a ticking clock, which weakens our position? Is there merit in the suggestion in today’s Financial Times, which apparently the Prime Minister is considering, to have a transitional arrangement of several years afterwards? Is it not time that hon. Members debated that?

[Mr Davis]

I am afraid I do not recognise anything in today’s Financial Times.

Exiting the European Union

Debate between Mike Gapes and David Davis

Monday 5th September 2016 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

My right hon. Friend is not known for understating his case, but I would point out that it was 17.5 million people who made that judgment. He is right: much of the gloom and doom and fearmongering that went on before the referendum has been proven to be wrong. That said, I would not be quite so unalloyed in my optimism as he is, because of course we are in a world where there are a lot of economic pressures. That is why the meetings in China are taking place now. He makes his point brilliantly, as always, and I agree with its main thrust, but let us not get too optimistic before we close the deal.

[Mike Gapes (Ilford South) (Lab/Co-op)]

The Secretary of State said that he wants to have the supremacy of this Parliament. If we are a sovereign, supreme Parliament, why is this Parliament not going to have the decision as to when we trigger article 50?