EU Exit: Negotiations and the Joint Committee — House of Lords, 2020-10-21
Topic: Foreign Trade
Sarah Ludford (Liberal Democrats, Centre to centre-left): My Lords, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster claimed that the UK was "increasingly well prepared" for what he called "leaving the EU on Australian terms".—[Official Report, Commons, 19/10/20; col. 756.] Putting aside the fact that "Australian terms" is just a euphemism for no deal, whereby the UK trades on WTO terms and our exports face tariffs and quotas, the cries of pain from business are audible for all to hear. They are far from having the "high hearts and complete confidence" at the prospect of no deal that the Prime Minister expressed—or indeed at the prospect of the skinny deal that represents the height of government ambition The Government have launched a "Time is running out" campaign urging businesses to get ready. But get ready for what? The Government must acknowledge that they are the ones keeping businesses in the dark The Road Haulage Association described a meeting with Michael Gove about post-Brexit arrangements last month as "a washout" in which they got "no clarity" on how border checks will operate when the transition period ends. In an interview on Monday, its managing director of policy and public affairs, Rod McKenzie, responding to Mr Gove’s claims, in a Statement, of "putting in place new IT systems to help goods flow across borders" and "giving business access to customs professionals,"—[Official Report, Commons, 19/10/20; col. 757.] said: "It’s a bit of a cheek to say that ... It would be fine to accuse people of having their head in the sand and not having done anything if we knew what we had to do. The problem is the Government has spent not just months, but years, failing to tell the businesses that need to make this work what exactly they have to do…they haven’t prepared the IT systems that will make this work … and they haven’t hired enough customs agents to plough through the mountain of red tape that will be created by this new system.’ Then there is business as a whole. The BBC’s business editor, Simon Jack, tweeted yesterday about how business leaders had described a call with the Prime Minister and Mr Gove as "terrible," "unbelievably disrespectful to the concerns of business" and "more of a lecture", with the Prime Minister accusing them of "too much apathy" There is still no clarity as to what the trading relationship will be. The Government need to acknowledge that business does not have the certainty that it needs. Will the Minster retract the absurd claims that businesses have their head in the sand or are displaying apathy in preparing for Brexit? Will he accept that the Government’s current plan is very far from being "oven ready", as claimed? Attentive listeners will detect a bit of a pattern here. It is not just the EU that is getting accused by this Government or their acolytes of being in the wrong. It is business, experts, devolved Governments, mayors, judges, lawyers, the Church, the Civil Service and Parliament—especially, of course, the House of Lords. Gibraltar, Jersey and the Falklands are not exactly brimming with happiness and contentment, either. Perhaps, the Government should examine the mote in their own eye, rather than try to bully, bamboozle and blame everyone else. Their negotiating style has the effect of alienating almost every group they encounter, except, perhaps, rich Tory donors, including Russian ones. On security, Mr Gove made the truly astonishing claim to the other place on Monday in response to former Prime Minister Theresa May that security would be better outside the EU. Mrs May was seen to mouth "What?" in response to that astonishing and hopelessly untrue claim. The noble Lord, Lord Ricketts, tweeted yesterday: "If UK loses all access to EU systems from 1 Jan, as looks likely, there is no good Plan B." The noble Lord, Lord Anderson of Ipswich, said: "Without the ability to exchange data and intelligence across frontiers, law enforcement will be increasingly unable to cope. Everything from extradition to notification of alerts, crime scene matches and criminal record searches will be much slower, at best." I remind the Minister that these people are experts. Mrs May was the Home Secretary for several years who masterminded the process in 2014 whereby the UK opted to stay in all the important EU law enforcement measures. The noble Lord, Lord Ricketts, is a former National Security Adviser; and the noble Lord, Lord Anderson, is a former independent reviewer of terrorism legislation. If the Minister wants to tell me now what precisely is the "variety of methods and arrangements" whereby the UK "can co-operate more effectively to safeguard our borders outside the European Union than we ever could inside," and which "can intensify the security that we give to the British people,"—[Official Report, Commons, 19/10/20; col. 761.] then I am all agog to hear what those measures are. Otherwise, I shall continue to think it is the fantasy it appears to be. The Government need to get real, stop blaming everyone but themselves, stop talking pie in the sky and get on with the negotiations like an adult, not a tiresome toddler. How does Mr Gove’s claim, in the Statement, of "the UK’s commitment to upholding all our obligations under both the withdrawal agreement and the Belfast agreement"—[Official Report, Commons, 19/10/20; col. 757.] sit with the Government’s efforts to get the power to abjure them in the Internal Market Bill, with which this House expressed its severe displeasure yesterday?