House of Commons
Parliament

Conservative Jacob Rees-Mogg accuses the Attorney General of not answering "the basic point" about denying a motion passed by the House of Commons.

"It is not good enough," the MP adds.

Mr Rees-Mogg tells Mr Cox that when the government loses a vote it must follow the will of the House under a humble address.

It is no longer a matter of the government to judge if the motion is in the interest of the public as it has been decided a "higher authority", he says.

Mr Rees-Moog calls the Attorney General to publish the full legal advice.

Geoffrey Cox replies that "it cannot be right" that by means of a motion the House has the power, "blind", to call for any matter which has been discussed in connection with the government

"Where does it end?" he asks

Mr Cox adds MPs are unable to check the effect on the public interest and tells the opposite bench "to grow up and get real".

House of Commons
Parliament

Image source, HoC

Independent MP Frank Field asks the attorney general if he agrees that the amendment which he has tabled would provide the UK with a degree of certainty "which he [Mr Cox] has been unable to provide today".

Mr Field says his amendment "would give the House sovereignty on when the UK would leave the backstop, should the UK enter it".

He asks whether if Theresa May's deal is defeated next week, if this should be top of the new negotiations list for the European Union.

Attorney General Geoffrey Cox says "what we cannot do is anything that is incompatible with our obligations under the withdrawal agreement" and that any amendment which would introduce a qualification to the judgement "would be seen by the European Union as a failure to ratify it and would justify non-ratification on their part".

Geoffrey Cox concludes that if the House of Commons votes down the PM’s motion next week "there will be great and chaotic disorder".

House of Commons
Parliament

Former Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab asks the Attorney General to confirm that Article 20 of the agreement necessitates that the EU agree to the UK exiting the backstop even if negotiations have broken down.

He adds that the backstop may take 10 years to be struck down by EU courts.

"If he thinks that is too long," Mr Raab asks, "what is his best estimate?"

Geoffrey Cox replies that Article 20 permits both sides to put in place alternatives to the backstop if they protect the Irish border before the final agreement is reached. He adds there "could be series of agreements".

He says the article is not a "unilateral right of determination" but adds the agreement creates a procedure and obliges the EU to consider alternative arrangements.

He concludes it is "impossible to say" how long a challenge in EU legal challenge would take but the pressure would be "telling" on the member states and the EU.

House of Commons
Parliament

Image source, HoC

Labour MP Hilary Benn says "there is something to see here if the government can decide which votes of the House of Commons to respect and which to ignore."

"It was not the opinion of MPs, it was the will of House of Commons - what does this mean for democracy?" he questions.

He asks the attorney general to name a single example in international law of when a country's failure to act in good faith has successfully compelled one party to reach an agreement "as extensive as the one the government hopes to achieve in the political declaration".

"If there is I would very much like to hear about it," he concludes.

The Attorney General, Geoffrey Cox, says "we are in a unique situation and quite frankly, I doubt it."

He asks Hilary Benn what he expects the government to do, "he would find it a very difficult situation to resolve."

House of Commons
Parliament

Image source, HoC

Former Tory attorney general Dominic Grieve says the statement and accompanying document should be commended, and asks if Mr Cox will take the opportunity to confirm that there is nothing in it that is incompatible with the advice he gave to the government.

He says the document clearly lays out a situation where there would be checks and controls on products passing from Northern Ireland to the rest of the United Kingdom.

Mr Cox says he can't provide the confirmation Dominic Grieve seeks "without disclosing what advice, if any," he had given. However, he says there is no matter on which an MP can ask a question on where he is likely to give a different answer to what he gave the government.

It is true that there would be regulatory divergence between one part of the UK and another, he says, but it could be kept to a minimum. It would involve just 15 forms of products, on which checks are often already carried out at ports anyway.

The checks are mitigable, he says, and the question is really whether this is a good enough reason to reject a deal that secures Brexit.

The attorney general says he backs the plan as he does not believe the UK will be permanently "entrapped".

House of Commons
Parliament

Image source, HoC

Labour MP and former solicitor general Harriet Harman says the attorney general's statement "does not represent compliance with the motion of this House and is a fundamental point of constitutional principle".

She says the attorney general has a duty "to this House as well as the government" and it is "terrible" that he has "willingly agreed to not comply with the wish of the House".

Attorney General Geoffrey Cox says: "I am caught in an acute clash of constitutional principle."

He says if he had given full advice "would it be right for the attorney general, regardless of the harm to the public interest, to divulge his opinion - it wouldn't".

"I cannot take a step that I firmly and truly believe would be contrary to the public interest," he says, and confirms that is the only reason the convention is being broken, "there is nothing to see here."

House of Commons
Parliament

Image source, Hoc

Chair of the European Scrutiny Committee Tory MP Sir Bill Cash says there have been five previous occasions where the attorney general's advice has been disclosed, and asks if Mr Cox agrees that he should disclose the full advice given to the government in line with the ministerial code.

Geoffrey Cox says his advice was not on a question of the lawfulness of the government's action - as it was with the published advice on Iraq - but simply a view on the legal effects of a political agreement.

"I cannot see why there is anything exceptional about the circumstances or about my advice," he says, so a summary of the advice should be sufficient.

"I am here to be asked," he says, and that MPs only have to ask what they want to know.

House of Commons
Parliament

DUP Westminster leader Nigel Dodds says the agreement is "deeply unsatisfactory" and asks the attorney general to confirm that the backstop can be "permanent in law".

Mr Dodds asks if Northern Ireland will be in the EU customs union rather than the UK's.

He questions if the Northern Ireland protocol allows the EU to oversee certain aspects of the Belfast Agreement.

Nigel Dodds calls on Mr Cox to recommend the agreement is "rejected".

The attorney general says the DUP MP throws "down a gauntlet" and that he "wrestled" with the agreement.

"I am unionist," he says.

Geoffrey Cox says he dislikes any divergence but adds the arrangement can be avoided. He tells the House the backstop is an "instrument of pain" for both parties.

He adds no other single market trader will have Northern Ireland's advantage and that any EU arbitration under Article 50 in the matter is "likely to win".

House of Commons
Parliament

Image source, HoC

Tory MP Iain Duncan Smith asks if Geoffrey Cox agrees that good faith is required as a matter of law with regards to the backstop.

Geoffrey Cox says there would need to be clear and convincing evidence that the breakdown of communication is due to bad faith, but if the EU refused to engage with the UK, "it would be a hallmark of a breach of good faith".

"It is meaningful in law," he says, "there are reputations at stake - if you make an obligation to fulfil something by a deadline, you must stick to this."

"You cannot play fast and lose with a meaningful obligation," he concludes.

House of Commons
Parliament

Image source, HoC

SNP spokesperson Joanna Cherry says the motion orders the production of any legal advice in full, not a commentary. The government conceded that these were exceptional circumstances and that that ship has sailed, she says.

By pretending that the published document answers any of the questions asked, compared to the advice leaked over the weekend, he is risking being found in contempt of Parliament merely to protect the Conservative Party, she says.

She calls for the full advice to be released before Parliament begins tomorrow.

She asks if it is correct that there is nothing to stop, in the matter of law, the backstop being the permanent relationship between the EU and UK.

Mr Cox says there is nothing to stop that being the case indefinitely, but this would be "highly vulnerable to legal challenge". Article 50 is widely regarded as not a sound legal foundation of permanent arrangements between two countries, he adds.

If negotiations broke down it would lead to the backstop being triggered, he says, but the legal situation is by itself sufficient to provoke the EU to do a deal with the UK.

"That is one factor that convinces me that this is a risk worth taking," he says.

House of Commons
Parliament

Image source, HoC

Father of the House Ken Clarke says it would be quite shameful if the EU, Republic of Ireland or the UK was given the right to terminate the backstop "at a time of its political choosing".

"None of the parties will have a motive in wanting to stay indefinitely in the protocol," he adds.

Geoffrey Cox says the Northern Ireland protocol would "represent a solemn commitment to the people of Northern Ireland that we will respect the Belfast Agreement.

"I would have preferred to have seen a unilateral right of termination in this backstop, but I am interested to lend my support to this agreement because I do not believe we will be trapped in it permanently," he adds.

Geoffrey Cox says "this represents a sensible compromise - it has unattractive elements but these must be weighed up against the realities of the alternatives."

House of Commons
Parliament

Image source, HoC

Geoffrey Cox says the Labour spokesman has far better than access to legal advice given to the government, "he can ask me...I will give him a frank and simple answer."

It's very rare for the attorney general to appear before MPs to answer legal questions, he says, and if the questions are asked, he'll answer them.

The Northern Ireland backstop will subsist and there's no point in the government trying to disguise that, he adds.

There are hundreds of treaties throughout the world that are permanent, he answers Nick Thomas Symonds question.

There is no right to terminate, he says, but the question of how likely it comes into force is a political judgement.

House of Commons
Parliament

Image source, HoC

Shadow solicitor general Nick Thomas-Symonds says it is "totally unacceptable" to be in this position when "bits of the attorney general's advice have been leaked to the press over the weekend".

He says calls for the final and full advice to be made available to all MPs before the meaningful vote were not listened to, and "offers short of that, including the attorney's general statement today, are not enough".

"The reality is that this government does not want to let MPs see the full legal advice due to fear of the political consequences," he says, and questions what political circumstances can be more exceptional than these to allow the full advice to be published.

Mr Thomas-Symonds asks the attorney general to name another treaty the UK is part of where the UK is unilaterally bound to a commitment that they cannot escape.

He asks the attorney general which parts of the backstop protocol are most likely to become permanent.

"This is a failure of the motion of the 13 November," he says. "The government must do the right thing and make all this information available, this House and this country deserves better from this government."

House of Commons
Parliament

Image source, HoC

On EU law after Brexit, Mr Cox says the agreement provides for the application of EU law "where it is necessary" to do so. During the transition period, EU law will continue to apply while people and businesses adjust, he says.

However, at the end of this period on 31 December 2020, that will come to an end. It will only be relevant where necessary after that, when issues which are created and defined by EU law, such as citizens' rights.

It is inevitable that mutually protected resident and social security agreements be defined in reference to EU law, he says.

EU citizens in the UK will look to the UK courts and the EU independent monitoring authority for legal protection, but will no longer be able to refer an interpretation of law the the European Court of Human Rights, he adds.

Brexit calls for measured evaluation by MPs of the terms, he says, and the gradual loosening of ties with the EU will take take time to loosen.