'Customs union not provided any benefits for UK' - Tory peer
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
HoLCopyright: HoL
Conservative peer Viscount Trenchard says the customs union has not been so beneficial as other peers have suggested.
"The customs union has not provided any benefits for the UK during the 20 years we've been a member," he says.
He says trade deals outside of the EU will offer "more value" to the UK.
"The customs union has not been quite so marvellous for this country as the opposition suggest," he says, calling for the government to stick to their plan of leaving to do trade deals independently with faster growing economies.
'We must offer a higher level of certainty to businesses' - Lib Dem
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
HoLCopyright: HoL
Liberal Democrat peer Lord Purvis of Tweed says if the amendment passes, it shows that the Lords is committed to providing a level of certainty that the government is not.
He says the Liberal Democrats support the free economic movement of goods and people which "benefits all parts of the Untied Kingdom".
The "uncertainty" that surrounds potential future trade deals is "depressing", he says, and adds that a customs union is "better than the government's current proposal, whatever it is likely to be".
"We must offer a higher level of certainty to businesses," he concludes, arguing that the government "must avoid the disastrous impact that leaving the customs union would involve".
Labour peer introduces amendment 13
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
HoLCopyright: HoL
Lord Stevenson of Balmacara says the purpose of amendment 13 is to give the Commons the chance to say whether they wish to remain in the customs union.
It would protect jobs, livelihoods and would go a very long way to providing a permanent solution for Northern Ireland, he adds.
He says it would mean the rollover of trade agreements - "which isn't going terribly well" - is unnecessary , and would offer certainty to business and industry.
He notes that many senior business figures support this policy.
"This amendment allows the Commons another chance to think about a really important issue," he concludes.
Background: Labour amendment on customs union
Trade Bill
AFPCopyright: AFP
The next amendment to be debated is Labour's amendment 13.
This amendment would make it an "objective" of the government during the Brexit talks to pursue a free trade deal allowing the UK to stay in "a customs union" with the EU after Brexit.
The amendment has some cross-party support, with crossbench peer Lord Kerr of Kinlochard and Liberal Democrat peer Lord Purvis of Tweed putting their names to it.
If a vote on the amendment is called and the government is defeated, this would set up an interesting battle on the issue when it returns to the Commons.
BreakingGovernment defeated on Labour amendment 12
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
The government has been defeated on Labour's amendment 12.
The amendment passed by 215 votes to 168.
Contents: 215
Not Contents: 168
Majority: 47
Peers now move on to discuss amendment 13.
Peers vote on Labour's amendment 12
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Labour peer Lord Stevenson of Balmacara says he wishes to test the opinion of peers and therefore will push his amendment 12 to a vote.
Peers are now voting on amendment 12 which calls for parliamentary approval of trade agreements.
The result is expected in around 15 minutes.
Labour peer calls on minister to offer counter proposal at third reading
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
HoLCopyright: HoL
Labour peer Lord Stevenson of Balmacara says if Baroness Fairhead thinks the government and the opposition are "as close as she thinks" on what the scrutiny role of Parliament should be, she should return at third reading with a counter proposal that would be accepted by all.
Lord Stevenson says the government is living "in a fantasy land", and the issue is "of principle - about who has the right to make decisions that will affect the country".
On Viscount Hailsham's concerns about what would happen if the Lords and Commons disagreed on whether the government's negotiations on a particular trade deal were appropriate, Lord Stevenson says the view of MPs would take priority as they are a fully elected chamber.
Baroness Fairhead says she would be "happy" to discuss it further, but she "cannot guarantee" to come back with any changes at third reading.
On that basis, she says, Lord Stevenson will have to choose whether he wishes to push his amendment to a vote.
Amendment 12 'would not be appropriate' - Minister
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
HoLCopyright: HoL
Baroness Fairhead says that committees will be free to undertake their own impact assessments, and that it would not be appropriate for the government to outline when this should happen.
It would be "highly unusual" for a committee's recommendations to be laid out in statue in the way this amendment suggests, she says, adding: "It would not be appropriate."
"Although we share much common ground here, we cannot support this amendment," Baroness Fairhead says.
She notes that last week the government set out clear commitments to parliamentary scrutiny whilst providing flexibility for amendments to be made.
Command paper outlines Parliament's 'enhanced scrutiny'
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
International Trade Minister Baroness Fairhead says the government's proposals give Parliament "enhanced scrutiny", and that this is outlined in the command paper.
"We are keen to make sure we do not lock ourselves into a process by having detailed additions to a bill which would be difficult to change," she adds.
"There is an ability for Parliament to scrutinise at every stage, and a committee will meet in confidence to analyse trade deal negotiations."
Baroness Fairhead says CRaG (the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010) is still the government's preferred choice for scrutiny.
Under CRaG, the government will lay before Parliament any treaties it intends to ratify alongside an explanatory memorandum which will summarise the content of each trade agreement.
She agrees that devolved administrations will have a crucial scrutiny role and that discussions for a concordat to be created for future trade agreements will ensure there is "strong and ongoing discussions".
'We plan to consult Parliament at every stage'
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
HoLCopyright: HoL
International Trade Minister Baroness Fairhead says amendment 12 seeks to ensure that Parliament has a role in approving negotiations of free trade agreements which "is an objective that the government shares".
Baroness Fairhead says last week the government committed to publishing information about future trade deal negotiation, and that the government will work closely with committees "to ensure we can work closely from start to finish".
Requiring an agreement of both Houses for a trade agreement to be ratified goes against the function of the executive's ability to present "a single unified voice", she says.
Regarding the setting of mandates, Baroness Fairhead says the government has looked at other countries, and found that the role outlined in this amendment does not exist in other legislatures.
"We plan to consult Parliament at every stage of the negotiations," Baroness Fairhead says, disagreeing with Lord Hannay's statement that Parliament's scrutiny role has so far been ignored by the government.
The government's command paper calls for consideration and discussion, she notes.
Scrutiny procedures needed 'to take back control'
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Crossbench peer Lord Bilimoria says the government has "consistently tried to bypass Parliament" which is "not transparent".
He says EU agreements need ratification by member states, and that it is "crucial" to have these scrutiny procedures in place "so that in the words of Brexiteers - we can take back control".
Crossbench peer Lord Kerr of Kinlochard adds that if peers do not accept Labour's amendment, they will be "weakening the hand of the UK in future negotiations".
'Yes to discussions, no to need for committee approval' - Tory peer
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
HoLCopyright: HoL
Conservative peer Viscount Hailsham stands to speak against the Labour amendment.
He questions what would happen if the Lords accepted a trade negotiation attempt, but the Commons did not.
It is "a very good idea" that a negotiating mandate should be placed before the appropriate committee and both Houses, he says, but notes that he does not agree that a negotiating mandate "must be made subject of approval" to the committee.
"Yes to discussions to negotiate, but no to the need for committee approval," he adds.
'Parliament should have say in final ratification of deals'
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Liberal Democrat peer Lord Purvis of Tweed adds that the use of the prerogative power has changed over years and this "modernisation" means it is "appropriate that Parliament has a say in the final ratification" of future trade deals.
He says the process of a consultation with committees was "lacking" in the government's command paper, noting that the government has "not shared" agreement related papers in recent times.
"We are wishing to build on the command paper and improve it," he concludes.
'Future trade agreements should be carefully scrutinised by Parliament'
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
HoCCopyright: HoC
Rising to support the amendment, crossbench peer Lord Hannay of Chiswick says it is "a sad defect" that there is no clear role for Parliament in the current arrangements.
He says a public consultation on trade agreements is welcome and important, but both Houses of Parliament should have the provisions and opportunities to scrutinise the actions of the executive.
The government's preferred process of scrutiny is "much weaker" than that proposed in this amendment by Labour, he says, noting that trade agreements should be "carefully scrutinised by Parliament."
Arrangements 'do not provide proper role for Parliament'
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
HoLCopyright: HoL
Labour peer Lord Stevenson of Balmacara moves amendment 12 which calls for parliamentary approval of future trade agreements.
Lord Stevenson says he thought it was decided some time ago that royal prerogative had "had its day", but that with the executive in charge of trade agreements with little scrutiny, this is seemingly not the case.
Under royal prerogative, governments can make decisions without the backing or, or consultation with, Parliament.
"Our country needs a modern system to approve trade agreements, rooted in reality not fantasy," he says, noting that Parliament and the government's roles "must be clearly laid out".
"The arrangements involved in the white paper do not provide a proper role for Parliament, nor do they give Parliament the role it should have in ratifying any agreements," he concludes.
Parliamentary approval of trade agreements amendment
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Labour's amendment 12:
Peers now debate amendment 12. This amendment calls for parliamentary approval of trade
agreements, and calls for the following rules to be followed before trade
negotiations commence:
a draft negotiating mandate must be laid and approved by
"the appropriately constituted committee and both Houses of Parliament
the committee must have first produced a sustainability
impact assessment on the trade deal to be negotiated
the text of the free trade agreement (FTA) must be laid and
approved by the committee, and be discussed with all devolved administrations.
Prior to approving the text, the committee must produce a report of
recommendations which must be reviewed by both Houses
a free trade agreement may not be ratified unless the
agreement has been laid before, and approved by an amendable resolution of,
both Houses of Parliament.
EEA membership 'means UK would have no control over borders'
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
HoCCopyright: HoC
Minister for International Development Lord Bates says the issue of the UK being a member of the EEA was discussed comprehensively at committee stage.
EFTA membership is not acceptable as it means free movement of persons within the four existing member countries, Lord Bates says.
Joining the EEA to stay in the single market "would mean the UK has no control over its borders", he adds.
Lord Lea of Crondall says free movement of persons is "an issue", as the UK "would be cutting off our nose to spite our face".
Lord Lea says the initiative is now with the House of Commons, and that he has confidence that in a few week it will become government policy.
On that basis, he says, he will not be pushing the amendment to a vote.
UK EEA membership 'sensible solution' - Labour
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
HoLCopyright: HoL
Labour peer Lord Lea of Crondall stands to move his amendment 11 which seeks UK membership of the European Economic Area (EEA).
He says given all other ideas are "falling by the wayside one by one like dominoes", this is a "sensible solution".
He adds that a UK membership of the EEA is supported by members from all parties.
Given where we are now, he says, "this is the only way we can remain a member of an agreed group of rules."
Lord Lea says he recognises his proposal "is not problem free", but disagrees with "the main criticism" leveled at UK membership of the EEA, which is that "the UK would be a rule taker and not a rule maker."
Labour amendment seeks EEA membership
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Labour's amendment 11:
Peers now begin debate of amendment 11 which seeks UK membership of the European Free
Trade Association and the European Economic Area.
The European Free Trade Association is a regional trade
organization and free trade area consisting of four European states: Iceland,
Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland.
The European Economic Area was established via the EEA
Agreement, an international agreement which allows for the extension of the
EU's single market to non-EU member parties. The EEA links the European Union
member states and three EFTA states (Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway) into
an internal market governed by the same basic rules.
The amendment is supported on a cross-party basis, with
crossbench peer Lord Hannay of Chiswick and Liberal Democrat peer Lord Purvis
of Tweed putting their names to it.
Irish deputy PM responds to Karen Bradley's security forces comments
AFP/ Getty ImagesCopyright: AFP/ Getty Images
The
Tánaiste, the Irish deputy prime minister, is to meet with Northern Ireland Secretary Karen Bradley this evening and will seek
a clarification of the comments she made in the Commons earlier today.
Ms Bradley said that killings at the hands of the security forces were "not crimes".
Sinn Féin deputy leader Michelle O'Neill described the comments as "offensive and hurtful".
The Tánaiste Simon Coveney said there should be effective
investigations into all deaths during the Troubles, regardless of the
perpetrator.
He added that in this regard, Ms Bradley's reaffirmation this afternoon that
“where there is evidence of wrong-doing it should always be investigated
whoever is responsible” is important.
Live Reporting
All times stated are UK
'Customs union not provided any benefits for UK' - Tory peer
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Conservative peer Viscount Trenchard says the customs union has not been so beneficial as other peers have suggested.
"The customs union has not provided any benefits for the UK during the 20 years we've been a member," he says.
He says trade deals outside of the EU will offer "more value" to the UK.
"The customs union has not been quite so marvellous for this country as the opposition suggest," he says, calling for the government to stick to their plan of leaving to do trade deals independently with faster growing economies.
'We must offer a higher level of certainty to businesses' - Lib Dem
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Liberal Democrat peer Lord Purvis of Tweed says if the amendment passes, it shows that the Lords is committed to providing a level of certainty that the government is not.
He says the Liberal Democrats support the free economic movement of goods and people which "benefits all parts of the Untied Kingdom".
The "uncertainty" that surrounds potential future trade deals is "depressing", he says, and adds that a customs union is "better than the government's current proposal, whatever it is likely to be".
"We must offer a higher level of certainty to businesses," he concludes, arguing that the government "must avoid the disastrous impact that leaving the customs union would involve".
Labour peer introduces amendment 13
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Lord Stevenson of Balmacara says the purpose of amendment 13 is to give the Commons the chance to say whether they wish to remain in the customs union.
It would protect jobs, livelihoods and would go a very long way to providing a permanent solution for Northern Ireland, he adds.
He says it would mean the rollover of trade agreements - "which isn't going terribly well" - is unnecessary , and would offer certainty to business and industry.
He notes that many senior business figures support this policy.
"This amendment allows the Commons another chance to think about a really important issue," he concludes.
Background: Labour amendment on customs union
Trade Bill
The next amendment to be debated is Labour's amendment 13.
This amendment would make it an "objective" of the government during the Brexit talks to pursue a free trade deal allowing the UK to stay in "a customs union" with the EU after Brexit.
The amendment has some cross-party support, with crossbench peer Lord Kerr of Kinlochard and Liberal Democrat peer Lord Purvis of Tweed putting their names to it.
If a vote on the amendment is called and the government is defeated, this would set up an interesting battle on the issue when it returns to the Commons.
The government only narrowly avoided defeat on a similar amendment when the Bill was debated at report stage in the Commons last July.
BreakingGovernment defeated on Labour amendment 12
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
The government has been defeated on Labour's amendment 12.
The amendment passed by 215 votes to 168.
Contents: 215
Not Contents: 168
Majority: 47
Peers now move on to discuss amendment 13.
Peers vote on Labour's amendment 12
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Labour peer Lord Stevenson of Balmacara says he wishes to test the opinion of peers and therefore will push his amendment 12 to a vote.
Peers are now voting on amendment 12 which calls for parliamentary approval of trade agreements.
The result is expected in around 15 minutes.
Labour peer calls on minister to offer counter proposal at third reading
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Labour peer Lord Stevenson of Balmacara says if Baroness Fairhead thinks the government and the opposition are "as close as she thinks" on what the scrutiny role of Parliament should be, she should return at third reading with a counter proposal that would be accepted by all.
Lord Stevenson says the government is living "in a fantasy land", and the issue is "of principle - about who has the right to make decisions that will affect the country".
On Viscount Hailsham's concerns about what would happen if the Lords and Commons disagreed on whether the government's negotiations on a particular trade deal were appropriate, Lord Stevenson says the view of MPs would take priority as they are a fully elected chamber.
Baroness Fairhead says she would be "happy" to discuss it further, but she "cannot guarantee" to come back with any changes at third reading.
On that basis, she says, Lord Stevenson will have to choose whether he wishes to push his amendment to a vote.
Amendment 12 'would not be appropriate' - Minister
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Baroness Fairhead says that committees will be free to undertake their own impact assessments, and that it would not be appropriate for the government to outline when this should happen.
It would be "highly unusual" for a committee's recommendations to be laid out in statue in the way this amendment suggests, she says, adding: "It would not be appropriate."
"Although we share much common ground here, we cannot support this amendment," Baroness Fairhead says.
She notes that last week the government set out clear commitments to parliamentary scrutiny whilst providing flexibility for amendments to be made.
Command paper outlines Parliament's 'enhanced scrutiny'
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
International Trade Minister Baroness Fairhead says the government's proposals give Parliament "enhanced scrutiny", and that this is outlined in the command paper.
"We are keen to make sure we do not lock ourselves into a process by having detailed additions to a bill which would be difficult to change," she adds.
"There is an ability for Parliament to scrutinise at every stage, and a committee will meet in confidence to analyse trade deal negotiations."
Baroness Fairhead says CRaG (the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010) is still the government's preferred choice for scrutiny.
Under CRaG, the government will lay before Parliament any treaties it intends to ratify alongside an explanatory memorandum which will summarise the content of each trade agreement.
She agrees that devolved administrations will have a crucial scrutiny role and that discussions for a concordat to be created for future trade agreements will ensure there is "strong and ongoing discussions".
'We plan to consult Parliament at every stage'
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
International Trade Minister Baroness Fairhead says amendment 12 seeks to ensure that Parliament has a role in approving negotiations of free trade agreements which "is an objective that the government shares".
Baroness Fairhead says last week the government committed to publishing information about future trade deal negotiation, and that the government will work closely with committees "to ensure we can work closely from start to finish".
Requiring an agreement of both Houses for a trade agreement to be ratified goes against the function of the executive's ability to present "a single unified voice", she says.
Regarding the setting of mandates, Baroness Fairhead says the government has looked at other countries, and found that the role outlined in this amendment does not exist in other legislatures.
"We plan to consult Parliament at every stage of the negotiations," Baroness Fairhead says, disagreeing with Lord Hannay's statement that Parliament's scrutiny role has so far been ignored by the government.
The government's command paper calls for consideration and discussion, she notes.
Scrutiny procedures needed 'to take back control'
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Crossbench peer Lord Bilimoria says the government has "consistently tried to bypass Parliament" which is "not transparent".
He says EU agreements need ratification by member states, and that it is "crucial" to have these scrutiny procedures in place "so that in the words of Brexiteers - we can take back control".
Crossbench peer Lord Kerr of Kinlochard adds that if peers do not accept Labour's amendment, they will be "weakening the hand of the UK in future negotiations".
'Yes to discussions, no to need for committee approval' - Tory peer
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Conservative peer Viscount Hailsham stands to speak against the Labour amendment.
He questions what would happen if the Lords accepted a trade negotiation attempt, but the Commons did not.
It is "a very good idea" that a negotiating mandate should be placed before the appropriate committee and both Houses, he says, but notes that he does not agree that a negotiating mandate "must be made subject of approval" to the committee.
"Yes to discussions to negotiate, but no to the need for committee approval," he adds.
'Parliament should have say in final ratification of deals'
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Liberal Democrat peer Lord Purvis of Tweed adds that the use of the prerogative power has changed over years and this "modernisation" means it is "appropriate that Parliament has a say in the final ratification" of future trade deals.
He says the process of a consultation with committees was "lacking" in the government's command paper, noting that the government has "not shared" agreement related papers in recent times.
"We are wishing to build on the command paper and improve it," he concludes.
'Future trade agreements should be carefully scrutinised by Parliament'
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Rising to support the amendment, crossbench peer Lord Hannay of Chiswick says it is "a sad defect" that there is no clear role for Parliament in the current arrangements.
He says a public consultation on trade agreements is welcome and important, but both Houses of Parliament should have the provisions and opportunities to scrutinise the actions of the executive.
The government's preferred process of scrutiny is "much weaker" than that proposed in this amendment by Labour, he says, noting that trade agreements should be "carefully scrutinised by Parliament."
Arrangements 'do not provide proper role for Parliament'
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Labour peer Lord Stevenson of Balmacara moves amendment 12 which calls for parliamentary approval of future trade agreements.
Lord Stevenson says he thought it was decided some time ago that royal prerogative had "had its day", but that with the executive in charge of trade agreements with little scrutiny, this is seemingly not the case.
Under royal prerogative, governments can make decisions without the backing or, or consultation with, Parliament.
"Our country needs a modern system to approve trade agreements, rooted in reality not fantasy," he says, noting that Parliament and the government's roles "must be clearly laid out".
"The arrangements involved in the white paper do not provide a proper role for Parliament, nor do they give Parliament the role it should have in ratifying any agreements," he concludes.
Parliamentary approval of trade agreements amendment
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Labour's amendment 12:
Peers now debate amendment 12. This amendment calls for parliamentary approval of trade agreements, and calls for the following rules to be followed before trade negotiations commence:
EEA membership 'means UK would have no control over borders'
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Minister for International Development Lord Bates says the issue of the UK being a member of the EEA was discussed comprehensively at committee stage.
EFTA membership is not acceptable as it means free movement of persons within the four existing member countries, Lord Bates says.
Joining the EEA to stay in the single market "would mean the UK has no control over its borders", he adds.
Lord Lea of Crondall says free movement of persons is "an issue", as the UK "would be cutting off our nose to spite our face".
Lord Lea says the initiative is now with the House of Commons, and that he has confidence that in a few week it will become government policy.
On that basis, he says, he will not be pushing the amendment to a vote.
UK EEA membership 'sensible solution' - Labour
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Labour peer Lord Lea of Crondall stands to move his amendment 11 which seeks UK membership of the European Economic Area (EEA).
He says given all other ideas are "falling by the wayside one by one like dominoes", this is a "sensible solution".
He adds that a UK membership of the EEA is supported by members from all parties.
Given where we are now, he says, "this is the only way we can remain a member of an agreed group of rules."
Lord Lea says he recognises his proposal "is not problem free", but disagrees with "the main criticism" leveled at UK membership of the EEA, which is that "the UK would be a rule taker and not a rule maker."
Labour amendment seeks EEA membership
Trade Bill
House of Lords
Parliament
Labour's amendment 11:
Peers now begin debate of amendment 11 which seeks UK membership of the European Free Trade Association and the European Economic Area.
The European Free Trade Association is a regional trade organization and free trade area consisting of four European states: Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland.
The European Economic Area was established via the EEA Agreement, an international agreement which allows for the extension of the EU's single market to non-EU member parties. The EEA links the European Union member states and three EFTA states (Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway) into an internal market governed by the same basic rules.
The amendment is supported on a cross-party basis, with crossbench peer Lord Hannay of Chiswick and Liberal Democrat peer Lord Purvis of Tweed putting their names to it.
Irish deputy PM responds to Karen Bradley's security forces comments
The Tánaiste, the Irish deputy prime minister, is to meet with Northern Ireland Secretary Karen Bradley this evening and will seek a clarification of the comments she made in the Commons earlier today.
Ms Bradley said that killings at the hands of the security forces were "not crimes".
Sinn Féin deputy leader Michelle O'Neill described the comments as "offensive and hurtful".
A man whose brother was shot dead by the Army on Bloody Sunday has called for the Ms Bradley to resign over her comments about the Troubles.
The Tánaiste Simon Coveney said there should be effective investigations into all deaths during the Troubles, regardless of the perpetrator.
He added that in this regard, Ms Bradley's reaffirmation this afternoon that “where there is evidence of wrong-doing it should always be investigated whoever is responsible” is important.