Sir Bernard Jenkin
MP for Harwich and North Essex · Conservative · United Kingdom
“I do not think that the Minister mentioned Essex in his statement, but he made a point about funding which I think is much appreciated—that areas have incurred costs in good faith. Does that apply to Essex?”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Another £2.2 billion of new taxes on business is by far its biggest effect, and the impact of the two previous, absolutely catastrophic Budgets remains embedded in Government policy. They hammered sectors such as hospitality, and businesses that used to enjoy employing a lot of young people can no longer afford to do so.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“No, I will not give away. Only 5.9% of the UK economy is goods exports to the EU. A much larger proportion goes outside the EU. Incidentally, during our period of membership, the proportion of GDP that we exported to the EU was in steady decline from 1992 to 2021. Other factors have led to the decline in our exports with the EU.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Their very large majority was a bit of an electoral accident, so many of them will lose their seats, but they can trust the Prime Minister, because he said on 25 September, “Don’t worry, the election will be in 2029”—just as he said, “We’re not going to reopen all the arguments about rejoining the EU” and, “We’re not going to reopen the a…”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The OBR says that debt rises from 95.5% of GDP this year to 97.3% in 2028-29. The headroom is just £15 billion in 2029-30, which is £7 billion less than at the last Budget. The OBR says there is only a 56% chance of meeting the rule. As the bond markets digest this Budget, I am not sure they will be quite as sanguine as they have been.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If the hon. Gentleman is saying, “If only we were not doing this later retirement thing, there would be more jobs for young people,” I have to say that managing the economy in that way is not very successful. It does not work. On the forecast, the Government set great store by what the IMF says about the UK’s deficit reduction programme.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
4,629 held · 4,625 searchable for Sir Bernard Jenkin. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 10.
This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.
“On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Earlier today, the Prime Minister promised that certain papers would be published as soon as they could be, but he did not give a time. Has there been any indication of when those papers will be published? We are still waiting for them.”
House of Commons15 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We know the very basic facts, which is that the Director of Public Prosecutions asked for a statement from the Government to clarify that, at the time of the offence, China was a threat to national security. He says in his letter that such an assurance, or evidence, or a statement from the Government were not forthcoming. We know that the Government withheld that vital element of the case. The Minister is shaking his head, but who decided that, in the words of the DPP, it would “not be forthcoming”? Somebody decided that. He seems to be saying that it was the deputy National Security Adviser who is somehow accountable for making those decisions, but I question that point. To whom are they accountable, if not to the National Security Adviser?”
House of Commons13 October 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“May I just point out that it was as plain as day, after the exchanges between the Prime Minister and my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition yesterday, that Lord Mandelson could not possibly carry on in his role? Why did the Prime Minister delay—or did he have to wait to be told what to do by Morgan McSweeney? Who is going to be the new ambassador, and how quickly will the new ambassador be appointed at this absolutely critical time, when Russia is testing the defences of NATO countries and we are showing such a weak response?”
House of Commons11 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am most grateful to the Minister for giving way. I am afraid my question goes back to the cost of the deal, which will hang around the Government’s neck like an albatross for the rest of their time in office. We know that the Government Actuary says the gross cost is £35 billion. Please can the Minister enlighten the House and help hon. Members to understand his own calculations? What is the meaning of “social time discounting”?”
House of Commons9 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am most grateful to my right hon. Friend for giving way. Does it not speak volumes about the real nature of this Government that despite facing a fiscal crisis and potentially a crisis in their finances—they want more money spent on health and benefits, because that is what they do—their priority is listening to leftie lawyers pontificating about decolonisation and committing billions of pounds of long-term liabilities to give away and lease back something that we already own? Does that not say something about the extraordinarily myopic preoccupations of this Government? Of course, we told the Foreign Office to get lost.”
House of Commons9 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On the previous question of how much operational independence we will really have, can my right hon. Friend comment on point 4 of annex 1 of the agreement, entitled “Mauritian Security Review”, which requires us to consult Mauritius before any “construction or emplacement of any maritime installation” or “any proposal for development in the land territory of the Chagos archipelago”? It also states that Mauritius shall conduct a security review, and that our permission to carry out works is dependent on the outcome of the Mauritius security review. We do not have operational independence under this treaty. It then goes through the dispute process, and there is no decisive way of deciding anything unless there is agreement between the two Prime Ministers. It is a completely inadequate agreement.”
House of Commons9 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I should clarify that what I quoted from article 4 of the treaty does not apply directly to Diego Garcia; it only applies to an area beyond Diego Garcia and for the development of land territory that is on the archipelago but beyond Diego Garcia. I should have made that clear. I inadvertently misled the House, and I apologise for doing so.”
House of Commons9 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The House should be grateful to the Secretary of State for giving this statement today, because it underlines how the Government are determined to keep this issue at the top of the British political agenda. He gave quite an optimistic assessment of how we, the Ukrainians and her allies, are doing in Ukraine, only inasmuch as Russia cannot win this war. The risk—something I hope he will emphasise to President Trump—is that the west is losing the peace, and that by losing the peace we are losing our own security. In the words of his own strategic defence review, we need to mobilise the British people to have a national conversation as to why we need to step up our efforts. Are we really giving Ukraine enough? I do not think we are.”
House of Commons1 September 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That point cannot be overstated, because many Northern Ireland veterans already suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder and other mental health problems. I speak as a vice-president of the mental health charity Combat Stress. The very idea that there are people who are nowhere near a prosecution or potential prosecution but are now haunted by not only the trauma of their service but the possibility that they will be dragged to a court and exposed in some way, with their families saying, “Daddy, did you really do something wrong?”—it cannot be overstated how utterly brutal this is. It is a deliberate campaign by those who are trying to bring these prosecutions.”
House of Commons14 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am as passionate as the Secretary of State about achieving net zero across the world and about the decline in species in our natural environment, but that cannot be the only thing we worry about. I do not know whether he has had time to read the “Fiscal risks and sustainability” report produced last week, but it shows that the cost to the public Exchequer of achieving net zero will be 21% of GDP. We know that an argument is going on inside the Government and inside the Labour party about this very issue. This is a question of balancing the risks, because if the Government run out of money because they are overspending, there will not be any money to spend on reversing climate change.”
House of Commons14 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“How can I possibly welcome the Secretary of State’s statement when, by her own admission, she has cancelled the A12 widening scheme and said nothing about the dualling of the A120 between Braintree and Marks Tey? How does she intend Braintree, Colchester and Tendring to deliver the massive new housing targets imposed by the Government with no new road or rail infrastructure at all?”
House of Commons8 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. In my 33 years in this House it has always been the practice that a statement of this nature would be made alongside a White Paper, which would be available in the Vote Office to Members as soon as the Secretary of State sits down. There is no White Paper in the Vote Office to explain the detail of the Government’s decision making. Is there anything you can do to elucidate from the Secretary of State whether a White Paper will be forthcoming and when that will be?”
House of Commons8 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Has the Chief Secretary seen the much longer-term forecasts by the OBR for the growth in public spending and the growth in debt rising to more than 250% of GDP in decades to come and the debt interest rising to 12% of GDP? Now that there is a gaping hole in the Government’s financial plans because of the votes last week and the U-turns on welfare reform, why does he think that he can play for time, instead of acting to give the markets confidence before they lose confidence?”
House of Commons7 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If he were Secretary of State for Transport, he would never dream of putting the air accidents investigation branch into the Civil Aviation Authority, because they have completely different and separate functions. That needs to be understood across the health service, and it is obviously not well understood at the moment.”
House of Commons3 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I join others in welcoming much of the Secretary of State’s plan, but I want to return to the question of the Health Services Safety Investigations Body, to which my right hon. Friend the Member for Melton and Syston (Edward Argar) referred. I welcome the tone of the Secretary of State’s response to that part of my right hon. Friend’s questions, but will he agree to meet those of us from the Select Committee—a cross-party group of people—who campaigned over many years to bring this body, which is still in its infancy, into existence before making any further decisions on it? As my right hon. Friend says, HSSIB is not a regulator, and to put it in with a regulator will create confusion about what it is.”
House of Commons3 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“May I follow up on that and ask the Minister whether he will undertake to have a full, frank and open discussion with the relevant directorates within his Department about what it has learned from this disaster? In particular, what exercises, tabletop or virtual, must be undertaken to practise resilience in the event of future such failures? My right hon. Friend the Member for East Surrey (Claire Coutinho) is right to warn about the increasing fragility of energy security in this country. There is plenty of informed opinion that supports that view.”
House of Commons2 July 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I very much welcome NATO’s commitment to 3.5% core defence spending, and 5% on a broader definition by 2035, for all NATO member states. However, the Prime Minister and the Government have published spending figures only up until 2030. When will they publish public spending plans for 2030 to 2035? Is it not incumbent on them to show how the target of 3.5% for core defence spending will be met by the Government? Otherwise, it is just an unfunded promise.”
House of Commons26 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It appears that the House agrees with the Government’s objective that Iran should never have nuclear weapons, but the Government are prepared to will the ends but not the means. This begs the question: who is really running the Government? Why did Lord Hermer’s opinion on the legality of UK involvement in military action become public last week? Was it leaked? Was it briefed? Does this not demonstrate that the Government are paralysed and divided on this question instead of leading from the front?”
House of Commons23 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“T2. May I invite the Secretary of State to come and visit the outstanding Market Field special school in my constituency, which was rebuilt and dramatically expanded under the Conservatives? I have been listening to what she has been saying about expanding special needs provision. Will she give an assurance that the number and capacity of special schools will continue to be expanded and that we will not return to the failed policy of the previous Labour Government?”
House of Commons16 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will the Foreign Secretary confirm that the State of Israel has a declared policy on its nuclear weapons of no first use and that there is no evidence that it has ever misused or threatened to misuse its nuclear weapons in any irresponsible way whatsoever? Does he agree, moreover, that in international law there is the right of pre-emptive military action, and it is hard to imagine how that would not apply in this case, given Iran’s determination to destroy the State of Israel?”
House of Commons16 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Can we take it that the Mauritius treaty will not be ratified until the House has approved the legislation providing for the very substantial expenditure that it involves?”
House of Commons12 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“May I remind the Leader of the House that when I referred to the prayer tabled by my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition against the Mauritius treaty, in early-day motion 1398, she was unable to give an undertaking that this will be debated within the 21-day period laid down by the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010? [ That the Agreement, done at London and Port Louis on 22 May 2025, between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of the Republic of Mauritius concerning the Chagos Archipelago including Diego Garcia, should not be ratified. ] However, in a subsequent answer to the hon. Member for Brent West (Barry Gardiner), she made it clear that the global ocean treaty would not be ratified until the necessary legislation had been passed.”
House of Commons12 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will the Government give an assurance that the motion will be debated in Government time before the expiry of those 21 days so that the House gets a proper opportunity to decide whether the treaty should be ratified?”
House of Commons5 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Leader of the House for the Government’s assurance that the Chagos islands treaty will be debated in the House. May I draw her attention to the prayer of early-day motion 1398, tabled by my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition and others? [ That the Agreement, done at London and Port Louis on 22 May 2025, between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of the Republic of Mauritius concerning the Chagos Archipelago including Diego Garcia, should not be ratified. ] Compliant with the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010, a debate is required within 21 sitting days of laying a treaty before the House. The treaty was laid on 22 May.”
House of Commons5 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on securing this debate. The fact that there are so many Members in the House this afternoon underlines that this is a very big problem that crosses party political boundaries and all kinds of constituencies. Harwich, Brightlingsea, Manningtree and other places in my constituency are losing their banking facilities. The Government are spending money on trying to revive Harwich high street, but neither the previous Government nor this Government have done anything to secure the banking facilities that are the lifeblood of a high street. I really welcome this debate. I am not sure that post offices are the answer. I think we need to make sure there is a proper bank on every high street.”
House of Commons5 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Does the Minister agree that any party that aspires to government in this country should be wholeheartedly and unambiguously committed to our independent nuclear deterrent? I am afraid that that was not always the case when we had a coalition under the Conservatives because of our coalition partners, but I am very pleased that they have repented now. Is it not absolutely extraordinary that a party that now presents itself as some kind of alternative Government cannot even send a single Member of Parliament to sit in this House while we are debating this existential issue for the security of our country?”
House of Commons2 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The document says that “this will allow us to grow our nuclear-powered attack submarine fleet to up to 12.” Is not the truth—and let’s speak the truth—that that is the ask to the Treasury, and the spending review has yet to decide what the defence programme will be? I hear what the Secretary of State says, when he says with his full force and sincerity that “we will fund this defence review”, but how will he achieve that without much more significant cuts to other budgets? No Government can afford to spend and borrow much more, if anything at all, so how will he get the necessary cuts through to fund this big increase in defence spending, beyond 3.5% because we all know we will need more than that?”
House of Commons2 June 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I promise you, we will make sure that they never hear the end of it.”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As the Government say, NATO is the cornerstone of our defence, and that is how we co-operate with our European partners on defence. EU defence is an add-on that has been in the minds and the ether of the EU since the Maastricht treaty, but it has never come to anything substantial.”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I want to correct the hon. Lady on a matter of fact. The dispute about sand eel fishing was resolved, under the trade and co-operation agreement, by a bilateral arbitration panel. It had nothing to do with the European Court of Justice. It is a normal trading agreement. There was no involvement of the Court of Justice of the European Union. [Interruption.]”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Would the hon. Lady like to correct the record, because what she said was incorrect? We can prove it afterwards, and she will have to correct the record afterwards if that is the case.”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They have rejoined the single market for food and agriproducts, which means we are effectively back in the European Union as far as the regulation of food and agriproducts is concerned, only we do not have a say on the new laws that will be made and imposed on all British food businesses.”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Let us remind ourselves that these are the same people who hated the idea of leaving the EU, who campaigned passionately to stay in the EU for ideological reasons, who refused to accept the referendum result, who desperately tried to pervert the referendum result or get a second referendum, and who, in their hearts, have never really accepted the referendum result. They long to rejoin. That is the motive behind this: they know they cannot rejoin the European Union because they know the voters will not have it, so they are rejoining by stealth. That is what they are doing.”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am grateful to be able to make a short contribution to this debate. I will not repeat everything I said in last week’s debate, but I want to make this point. The hon. Member for Walthamstow (Ms Creasy) said that we do not want to go back to the old arguments we had about Brexit at the time of the referendum and while we were negotiating the trade and co-operation agreement before we finally left, but that is exactly what the Government are doing. Who is trying to turn back the clock? Who has decided that we should rejoin the single market for food and agriproducts, having promised that we would not rejoin the single market? It is this Labour Government. The idea that the Government should be able to wash their hands of their responsibility to voters for honouring the referendum result is an absolute absurdity.”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We were told that the British economy would fall off a cliff, that the housing market would collapse, that interest rates would rocket—actually, none of those things occurred. When we left the European Union at the beginning of 2021, the dial hardly moved. Our economy was growing at roughly the same rate as other economies in the European Union.”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The House of Lords still has a European Affairs Committee, which held an inquiry in the run-up to the reset. There has been no inquiry into the reset by any Select Committee of the House of Commons, apart from the Business and Trade Committee. My hon. Friend the Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith) and my hon. Friend the Member for South Basildon and East Thurrock (James McMurdock) are absolutely right that we need to reinstate the European Scrutiny Committee, because there will be a flow of new regulations coming out of the European Union that should be scrutinised in the proper way, as they were when we were a member of the European Union. Without that, there is no proper scrutiny in this House at all. I will now move on briefly to the question of how bad Brexit really was as an economic event.”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Given all the exaggeration about how bad Brexit was going to be and how bad Brexit is, how seriously should we take what the Government are now saying about the huge benefits of this so-called reset?”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We were told by the Office for Budget Responsibility that there might be a 4% reduction in what our GDP would otherwise have been. That has not occurred—the OBR was wrong. Our economy has continued to grow at roughly the same rate as the other EU economies. Of course, there have been adjustments because the economy has a different trading relationship with the EU. We now have a very deep and comprehensive trading relationship with the EU, as opposed to being in the single market, but there are swings and roundabouts. There have been gains in other areas. The other big advantage is that our contribution to the European Union, which used to be very substantial, pushing up to £20 billion a year, is now right down, which is a huge advantage.”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Library does not say that Brexit is the cause of those declines. [ Interruption. ] It does not say that, and there are all sorts of factors. For example, we are closing down the North sea and exporting far less fuel. We used to import a lot of uncut diamonds and then export them to the EU, but we do not do that any more. That was worth £1 billion a year.”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Now that European regulation will be created and applied once again in the United Kingdom, even though we do not have any say over it, we should be able to scrutinise it properly through a proper scrutiny Committee. I would be grateful if the Minister would address that point.”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am afraid that all those so-called red wall seats are now vulnerable to a sense of betrayal among the voters that this Government cannot be trusted on even the most fundamental thing. I remind the Chamber again that 17.4 million people voted leave, which is a good deal more than the 9.7 million who voted Labour, giving them such an extraordinary majority on such a paltry share of the vote—less than 34%. The idea that this is a superior mandate and that the Government now have the right to overrule a referendum result is very dangerous territory. It is playing into the hands of the Reform party, which is the very thing that Labour fears. It is vital that we have the European Scrutiny Committee back.”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I suspect that, just as they exaggerated and continue to exaggerate the disadvantages of being outside the European Union, they are also grossly exaggerating the economic advantages of this deal. I come back to the point: if the referendum decided one thing, it was that we should no longer have our laws made in the European Union and that we should no longer have to contribute to the EU budget. Both of those commitments, which the Government made in their manifesto, have been betrayed. We have rejoined the single market in food and agriproducts, and we are going to contribute money to the European Union once again. This will have a sting in the tail for the Government.”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Well, under this new arrangement, we are going to have EU vets inspecting British farms and British food producers without any authority from the British Government, except through some kind of agreement. We also know that the agrifood SPS agreement has not yet been agreed. And why has it not been agreed? There is no start date given by the Government. We have not seen the small print. There will have to be legislation, and we do not know how much we will have to pay the EU for this so-called privileged access. It begs the question, given that shellfish was not locked out, and given that our shellfish exports to the EU remain substantially the same, what else are the Government saying about this deal that is completely untrue?”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They declined very substantially between 2019 and 2021, from 32 million tonnes to 25 million tonnes, largely because of covid, I suspect. In 2022 they declined a little bit more to 22 million tonnes. That is not off the menu —22 million tonnes of shellfish exported to the EU. They went up in 2023 to 23 million tonnes and have continued broadly at that level. They were not locked out. That is just not true. The fact is we have a different trading relationship. Yes, the EU puts up lots of stupid and time-wasting barriers to trade, but that is because it knows this Labour Government are suckers and have fallen into this trap. The Government think they are going to get rid of all these checks.”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am not giving way again. The basis for recalculating our trade statistics has changed. There is also what was known as the Rotterdam effect. The point is that our underlying economic growth is broadly the same. In Tuesday’s statement, the Prime Minister claimed: “The deal means that British goods that have long been off the menu in Europe can regain their true place, including shellfish”. —[ Official Report , 20 May 2025; Vol. 767, c. 890.] He went on to say, and he mentioned this several times: “Under the Conservatives’ deal, shellfish was locked out, but it can now be sold back into the market”. —[ Official Report , 20 May 2025; Vol. 767, c. 897.] So what are the statistics for shellfish exports to the EU?”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“May I point out that supermarkets tend to be interested in their balance sheets and profits, and not in democracy and accountability, which this debate is really about? Can the hon. Gentleman explain to the House what concessions the EU made in this deal?”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The point is, if people are prepared to compromise on dynamic alignment for food and agriproducts, what issue of principle will act as a barrier to prevent them extending that co-operation to other products or other fields of European law where they think it is ideologically convenient to do so? The only problem is that, if they think they are currying favour with the European Union by doing so, they will be disappointed, because the EU will simply ask for more concessions without making concessions of its own.”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is quite extraordinary that the hon. Lady does not understand the different between a bitter concession that was forced out of the previous Government, wisely or unwisely, that we deeply resented and was time-limited to five years, and an extension of 12 years, which is at least 2.2 times worse, for something freely given away. I remember when the Labour party used to deride the common fisheries policy as an ecological and social disaster. Now it is embracing it, and so is the hon. Lady. I can only assume that she does not represent any fishermen in her constituency.”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“There is another question. A truly bilateral youth exchange arrangement would be fine. It would be like the trade and co-operation agreement, with no reference to the European Court of Justice. Or is this going to be an extension of the withdrawal agreement arrangements involving EU citizenship, which is subject to the European Court of Justice and temporary and time-limited? The real question that the Minister has to answer is: what will be the involvement of the European Court of Justice in overseeing this arrangement?”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Where in the Labour manifesto did it say that we would start contributing to the EU budget once again? How much are we going to have to pay and when will we know?”
House of Commons22 May 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗