Article 50

Tom Pursglove Excerpts

Monday 7th November 2016 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

My hon. Friend is exactly right. It is the fact that 17.4 million people voted for us to leave the European Union that makes me confident that we can carry this through both Houses of Parliament.

[Tom Pursglove (Corby) (Con)]

You left it a long time to put me out of my misery, Mr Speaker. I am struggling somewhat, because we hear from Opposition Members and some in the country that, on the one hand, we need certainty for businesses—I agree with that and so do Ministers—and then, on the other hand, that they want to drag the whole process out with talk of next summer for invoking article 50. Has my right hon. Friend got on any better than I in understanding and deciphering exactly where they are coming from?

[Mr Davis]

Listening to my hon. Friend’s question, I am reminded of the biblical comment that the first should be last and the last should be first. He asks a first-class question. He is right that it is impossible to work out what they are trying to do unless one assumes that they are trying to foil the interests of the British people.

Parliamentary Scrutiny of Leaving the EU

Tom Pursglove Excerpts

Wednesday 12th October 2016 Commons Chamber

[Keir Starmer]

I am grateful for that intervention. There are two aspects to today’s debate. Partly, there is the political aspect: what is the role of Parliament. There is also the question of uncertainty. It is absolutely clear that, across business, across EU citizens and across the population as a whole, there is great uncertainty about what the plans are, and that uncertainty simply cannot be kept in place for the next three years. It is growing uncertainty.

[Tom Pursglove (Corby) (Con)]

Will the hon. and learned Gentleman set out for the House what scrutiny there was when the Lisbon treaty was ratified under the Gordon Brown Government?

[Keir Starmer]

There is different scrutiny for different treaties and provisions. One example is the scrutiny that was provided in relation to the original decision to go into the European Economic Community, because then, as I am sure the hon. Gentleman knows, Command Papers were put before the House. An economic impact assessment was also put before the House, and some of the Command Papers were voted on. The idea that scrutiny cannot be done and that it was not done in the past is wrong.

Next Steps in Leaving the European Union

Tom Pursglove Excerpts

Monday 10th October 2016 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davis]

The hon. Gentleman clearly has not been paying attention. The words I used were that we will obey all the conventions and laws that apply to the signing, reform or removal of European treaties. I suggest that he goes and looks those up.

[Tom Pursglove (Corby) (Con)]

What steps is my right hon. Friend taking to ensure that the voices of agriculture, industry and business more generally are heard as part of our Brexit negotiations, and to ensure that their needs are fully understood?

[Mr Davis]

First, there have been a number of consultations and discussions with those people. This whole exercise is an all-Government operation. That means that the individual Departments will deal directly with them. Secondly, the Treasury moved unusually quickly to ensure that they knew that their current round of funding was underpinned, for example under pillar 1 of the common agricultural policy. The Government are taking this matter extraordinarily seriously and they have no reason to worry.