Climate Change, the Environment and Global Development

Debate between Stephen Kerr and Wera Hobhouse
Wednesday 10th July 2019

(5 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Stephen Kerr Portrait Stephen Kerr (Stirling) (Con)
- Hansard - -

Will my right hon. and learned Friend give way?

Wera Hobhouse Portrait Wera Hobhouse
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman give way?

Oliver Heald Portrait Sir Oliver Heald
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I was just about to say how I would tackle the problem. Let me do that, then perhaps I will give way.

How do we tackle the problem? First, we have to bring forward the phase-out date for the sale of new petrol and diesel cars to at least 2035. Given the life cycle of a traditional car, the Committee on Climate Change is clear that ensuring that all cars and vans are electric by 2050, which is needed for net zero, will require all new vehicles to be electric by 2035, and I believe that is achievable. By 2025, new electric vehicles will have the same up-front cost as equivalent conventional models, and if we can get the infrastructure right by that point, there should be no reason for consumers not to buy an electric vehicle.

Leaving the EU: Customs

Debate between Stephen Kerr and Wera Hobhouse
Wednesday 16th May 2018

(6 years, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Wera Hobhouse Portrait Wera Hobhouse (Bath) (LD)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

With so much mistrust towards politicians, it is important that we all support transparency wherever possible. It prevents abuses of power and is vital for a healthy parliamentary democracy—a clear reason why so many people voted to leave. It is therefore very strange that the Government, who support leaving, are now acting in such a non-transparent way. Why are they against transparency? What do they have to hide? Here is the reason: since 2016 the Government have still not moved on from their position of having their cake and eating it.

The Cabinet are having an internal row about whether to support a technological solution or the idea of a customs partnership. The European Union has already rejected both proposals as being in la-la land. In the case of the technological solution, nowhere in the world is there a customs border without physical border checks. The only exception is the border between Alaska and Canada, separated by thousands of miles of ice. If the technology existed, why would countries such as Norway and Sweden, or the US and Canada, not use it?

A customs partnership would still be de facto a hard border and would not solve the issue of the Irish border. That is contrary to what the Prime Minister promised in the joint statement in December 2017.

Stephen Kerr Portrait Stephen Kerr
- Hansard - -

Will the hon. Lady give way?

Wera Hobhouse Portrait Wera Hobhouse
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

No, I have very little time.

The robust enforcement mechanism that the Government talk about would still mean that there would be physical border infrastructure. The frequency of checks does not take away the principle of a hard border. If the EU believes that the proposals are delusional but the Government believe that they are coherent, how do we establish who is right? That is why we need to see the written documentation from Government officials.

Leaving the EU: Data Protection

Debate between Stephen Kerr and Wera Hobhouse
Thursday 12th October 2017

(7 years, 1 month ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Stephen Kerr Portrait Stephen Kerr
- Hansard - -

That is the worse-case scenario of being on the receiving end of a flow of regulation with no input or influence over that at all. No, leaving the European Union means leaving the single market and the customs union.

Wera Hobhouse Portrait Wera Hobhouse (Bath) (LD)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Does the hon. Gentleman not agree that leaving the single market and the customs union was not on the ballot paper when the British people voted?

Stephen Kerr Portrait Stephen Kerr
- Hansard - -

I do not think that there is much virtue in rerunning the Brexit debate today, when we are discussing data, but I will say that it was well rehearsed, especially by the remain side, that leaving the European Union meant leaving the single market.

I am grateful for the opportunity to make a short contribution to this debate, and I do so from the perspective of having spent the past 30 years of my life in the world of sales. I should declare at the outset that I am a fellow of the Association of Professional Sales, a UK institution with a fast-growing global reputation. Its primary purpose is to raise the standard of sales professionalism, ethical sales conduct, and the overall talent and capability of sales professionals.

I recognise that this debate is about data protection as we leave the European Union, but let me be absolutely crystal clear: I am optimistic about the future of our country outside the European Union. I am not blind to the challenges that lie ahead, but I encourage Opposition Members who have a decided propensity to take a dim view of our future to brighten up. We have a great deal going for us in this country, and rather than cowering at the prospect of a global Britain, we should now embrace the opportunity.

So much of our national sales capability, which will be key to our global success, will hinge on our commitment to embracing new technologies. We in this country are driving the fourth industrial revolution, and I want our country, by which I mean—before my SNP colleagues shout, “Which country?”—the United Kingdom and Scotland—