Oral Answers to Questions

John Bercow Excerpts

Thursday 2nd November 2017 Commons Chamber

[Kate Green (Stretford and Urmston) (Lab)]

10. What steps he will take to maintain children's rights contained in the EU charter of fundamental rights in the event that that charter no longer applies in the UK once the UK leaves the EU.

[Mr Speaker]

I call Minister Walker.

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

I apologise for the delay, Mr Speaker; the question numbers have caught me out. With permission, I will answer Questions 10 and 17 together.

Reaching a reciprocal agreement to safeguard the rights of EU citizens in the UK, and UK nationals in the EU, is our first priority—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. The Minister is in rather a pickle and I am sorry for him—I feel his pain—but there is no grouping of Questions 10 and 17. [Interruption.] As in American football, the hon. Gentleman can have a brief timeout.

[Mr Walker]

Our commitment to children’s rights will remain unwavering after we have left the EU. The charter of fundamental rights did not create any new rights; instead it catalogued rights that already existed in EU law. These rights will be preserved by the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill and case law relating to them will be retained in UK law at the point we exit the EU.

--- Later in debate ---

[Robert Neill]

Because of our current ability to access European markets, the London financial services sector processes transactions worth about £880 billion every day. For context, that is about 100 times our net annual contribution to the EU, and about 15 times the highest sum that has been spoken of as a potential financial settlement. Against that background, does not my hon. Friend agree—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I am glad that the question mark is coming. Questions are terribly long-winded today; it really is very poor. Anyway—blurt it out, man!

[Robert Neill]

Against that background, is it not imperative that we secure a deal on leaving the European Union that will protect access to European markets for our financial services?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Davis]

The hon. Lady makes a good point. There are three reasons for the implementation period. One is to give businesses a significant amount of time after the decisions are made, so that they can make their decisions on the basis of clarity and certainty. The second is to give the Government time to prepare changes in the regulatory structures, regulations, customs and all the other things we have to do. The third is to give foreign Governments time to make accommodations too, because we will depend on, for example, French customs arrangements. Those are the three reasons. The first is, as the Chancellor says, a wasting asset if it goes on for very long—not immediately, but if it goes on for very long.

The European Council is, I think, on 13 or 14 December —anyway, it is in the middle of December. If it finds that there has been sufficient progress at that point, we will start straightaway and conclude as fast as we can. However, it is a negotiation and there are two sides to make the decision. The hon. Lady can take it as read that we will be as quick as we can on that to give as great an amount of certainty as early as possible to British business.

[Mr Speaker]

We are better informed as a result of the insistence of the right hon. Gentleman on including in his answer any consideration that might be thought, in any way at any time, to be in any degree material.

[Alan Brown (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (SNP)]

In the event of a no deal, why would the EU agree to a transitional period?

[Mr Davis]

In the light of your comments, Mr Speaker, the hon. Gentleman will have to ask the European Union that.

[Mr Speaker]

I call Stephen Kinnock. Not here—where is the feller?

[Stella Creasy (Walthamstow) (Lab/Co-op)]

I am hoping—

[Mr Speaker]

We are eagerly hoping to hear the hon. Lady’s question, but Question 1 will do for a start.

[Stella Creasy]

T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.

[Stella Creasy]

I thank the Minister for showing that time does not always mean talent. I am hoping he can help answer a question that my constituents keep asking: how much is all of this going to cost us? Departments do not seem able to answer that, and I have been asking them. Some of them think they are not paying anything at all, whereas others think everybody else is paying. The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy says it has received extra cash to pay for the impact of the Brexit negotiations; the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport says it does not know how much any of this is going to cost; the Department for Communities and Local Government says it is expecting the Treasury to pick up the tab; and the Ministry of Defence says it is not spending anything because it expects there to be a deal and so no funding is required. This is a bit of a mess, so can this Secretary of State commit to publishing, by Department, by year, details on how much money has been put aside for the cost of negotiations and whether that money is from the Department or from another budget?

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I know the hon. Lady is an academic doctor, but it is not necessary to treat Question Time as the occasion for the presentation of a thesis.

[Mr Davis]

The hon. Lady demonstrated the second half of her original quip; speed of wit does not equate to speed of question. The simple answer to her question is that, as we have already said, the Treasury is putting aside £250 million for contingency planning this year and a total of £500 million overall. That money will be spent where it is necessary, and that will change depending on the progress of the negotiations.