House of Lords
Parliament

Crossbench peer and former Head of the Civil Service Lord O'Donnell says that negotiating Brexit will put the civil service "under huge pressure". 

He adds that he hasn't yet heard of the government closing down work to free up civil servants to work on Brexit.

He urges the government not to include the reintroduction of borders between Ireland and Northern Ireland in any final deal.

He also calls for Parliament to have a serious role on what the final deal should cover - adding his surprise that the government's offer of a vote on the final deal was considered a concession.

Westminster Hall

Labour's Naz Shah said she wanted to show President Trump the positive cultural and economic contributions that Muslims have made in the UK, but fears that it might be too late.

She says that she, as a Muslim, is not "the enemy" as the president implies through his actions and rhetoric. 

Addressing criticism of double standards, she notes that we do not look to China or other countries accused of human rights violations for "shared values". 

House of Lords
Parliament

Conservative peer Lord Lawson was chair of the Vote Leave campaign.

He tells peers that it would not be a disaster if a trade deal with the EU is not reached.

He argues that it is nonsense that failure to reach a trade deal would lead to the UK "falling off a cliff edge" adding that the UK does more trade with the rest of the world than the EU. 

Concerning the passage of the bill through the House of Lords, he warns that it would be an "ill-advised, improper and fundamentally unconstitutional manoeuver" to seek to delay its progress. 

House of Lords
Parliament

Former Lib Dem leader Lord Campbell asks what will happen if "at the critical moment of departure" public opinion has changed.

What happens, he asks, if it becomes clear that the consequences of leaving will be adverse to our future?

"Is it not to be permitted that public is allowed to change its mind?"

Westminster Hall

Conservative James Cartlidge says that rescinding President Trump's state visit "will leave only one person smiling: Vladimir Putin."

He believes that the Russian president would benefit from a rift between the UK, the US and other western allies.

He says that removing the invitation for a state visit will make the UK a "laughing stock" and would damage the UK's national interests.  

House of Lords
Parliament

Labour's Baroness Jowell regrets that the government "declared at the outset" that the UK would leave the single market and the customs union.

She argues that it would have been better to have sought concessions from the EU on freedom of movement in exchange for the UK staying in the single market and customs union. 

Instead, she says, the government has given away "two of our limited quids" without securing any "EU quos" in return. 

"It is not a good start," she says and argues that this is why Parliament "needs to assert itself".

The Labour leader in the Lords criticises the lack of government planning for Brexit.

Westminster Hall

The SNP's International Affairs spokesman Alex Salmond claims that the prime minister offered the state visit due to "shared values", which he calls "stomach-churning". 

He cites Prime Minister Theresa May's previous claim that British values included respect of religion, something he believes the President has not demonstrated. 

He says that his experience of negotiating with President Trump has taught him that negotiating from a "weak position" will "lead to disaster". The state visit demonstrates such weakness, he believes. 

Westminster Hall

Image source, European Photopress Agency

Chair of the Defence Select Committee Julian Lewis says that the west has seen peace since World War II because of the strength of Nato - an organisation President Trump has criticised. 

He says that this alliance is "about more than the personal qualities of any individuals". He claims that "bringing him [the President] onside" is more important than berating him and "forcing him into to some sort of bunker".

Lib Dem Alistair Carmichael questions how a state visit could ensure President Trump's support of Nato. 

Mr Lewis replies that the UK actually shares some of the President's criticisms of the organisation.

Westminster Hall

Labour's David Lammy says that President Trump's visit to the UK was inevitable, but the "terms and the basis for which that is not". 

He believes that he should have only been accorded an official visit; a step below a state visit. 

He believes this is why the public are so angry. He says that the president had behaved so inappropriately during his campaign that offering him a state visit after "just seven days" was wrong. 

House of Lords
Parliament

Another former EU commissioner and Labour peer, Peter Mandelson, suggests that the prime minister is "terrified" of looking fainthearted on Brexit and is therefore "over compensating" by pursuing a hard Brexit.

This approach to Brexit is wrong, he says.

He also says that in the referendum, leave supporters did not back the UK becoming "a politically isolated offshore tax haven".

He believes that in the next 18 months, political circumstances will change. 

"So might people's minds," he says.

Westminster Hall

Conservative Nigel Evans says "when we attack Donald Trump for 'being racist', we are attacking the American people". 

He cites that the people who voted for President Trump were the "middle" and that people must leave their "echo-chambers" to understand him. 

He says that similar failures to recognise their voices led to Brexit in the UK. 

He also accuses MPs in favour of rescinding the state visit invitation of hypocrisy, citing the Chinese premier's state visit in 2015. 

Westminster Hall

Labour's Paul Flynn suggests that the Queen has been put "in an awkward position", and that there is no precedent a president should be invited for a state visit in their first year.

He also cites an article by journalist Andrew Rawnsley that the UK was "pimping out the Queen", much to Conservative Jacob Rees-Mogg's distaste.

There is a brief moment of laughter as Conservative Nigel Evans suggests that Paul Flynn - an ardent republican - would know what the Queen is thinking. 

Mr Flyn summarises that the debate is necessary as a failure to discuss it would create "cynicism" from the public. 

By not listening to the petition, people would have even greater reason to claim there is a "divide between politicians and the people", he says.

House of Lords
Parliament

The views of "our European neighbours" have been missing from the debate argues former EU Commissioner and Conservative peer Lord Hill of Oareford.

EU negotiators need to be able to trust the UK to be "clear and consistent" he says, adding that such consistency would be undermined by the suggestion of a second referendum.

He also says that EU countries are preparing for the future not "sitting there desperate to take us back". 

The rest of Europe, and UK businesses, wants to get on with its "post referendum life", he argues.

Westminster Hall

Paul Flynn is asked whether he thinks a man who used the phrase "grab her by the pussy" should be allowed to meet the Queen. He says not.

Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg accuses him of hypocrisy, claiming that the terminology "was wrong", but there was no complaint from Mr Flynn when Emperor Hirohito visited the UK - a man "responsible for the rape of Nanking". 

House of Lords
Parliament

The first of three Ukip peers who sit in the House of Lords now speaks. 

Lord Stevens of Ludgate argues that the EU is becoming increasingly unstable and says that it would be better to get out of the EU "before the house of cards comes tumbling down".

Brexit, he argues, will open up the UK to countries that are growing faster that EU nations including the Commonwealth "who have stuck with us through thick and thin". 

He urges peers to accept the bill as presented.