Gavin Robinson
MP for Belfast East · Democratic Unionist Party · United Kingdom
“One of the fundamental principles of the debate yesterday and on Monday was that of upholding the rule of law, and the Secretary of State will know our questions about how the rule of law is upheld in Northern Ireland.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Secretary of State will know that Micheál Martin will apologise today to the family of Brian Stack, who was murdered by the IRA in 1983. They apologise 43 years later and they apologise after a failed criminal justice investigation with 194 errors and omissions. They are right to do so.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Secretary of State misses the point. All that information sharing, which is permitted and is in the gift of those authorities, is about answering the question before the inquiry: whether UK state authorities could have prevented the atrocity.”
House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“He feared he had done something inexplicable: he had united the House against him. I did not agree with that assessment, but I believe he is approaching these issues with a level of diligence that we appreciate, and I thank him for that. Yesterday, I spoke more broadly about the Bill and the amendments then before the Committee.”
House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“867.] What started as a request from veterans has been welcomed by some veterans’ groups who think it will add some level of protection or cover from the infected process they see in Northern Ireland, but it will not.”
House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is “finally” from me, in respect of interventions. The Secretary of State should be cautious when trying to push back against the notion that there are vexatious prosecutions. There are; there have been. We have seen prosecutions in Northern Ireland where the evidential test was not met the first time.”
House of Commons20 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
1,923 lines on record for Gavin Robinson, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, without an account. Most recent 500 lines shown. Search to find more. 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.
“The inquiry has a cross-border dimension: when the courts in Belfast said in 2021 that there should be an inquiry in Omagh, they said there also needed to be one in the Republic of Ireland, because the bomb was constructed in the Republic of Ireland and was planted by a Provisional IRA bomb team who were operating from the Republic of Ireland, travelled from the Republic of Ireland and escaped to the Republic of Ireland. The hon. Member for Belfast South and Mid Down (Claire Hanna) indicated her support for such an inquiry in the south. It is for this reason that answers are required. What do we have so far? Reluctance on the part of the Irish Government—there is nothing new in that. The Irish Government have singularly failed to do anything on legacy apart from criticise the British Government for the past 30 years.”
House of Commons11 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“He is an ill man because of the attack. He has suffered greatly, yet he put his faith in the organisations in which he and members of our community should be able to have confidence, and he has received nothing. The Omagh inquiry started five weeks ago. The first four weeks were testimonies from the families who lost someone so tragically that day. Four months after the Belfast agreement was signed—four months after, when society was meant to be basking in peace—29 people and two unborn babies were killed that day in Omagh.”
House of Commons11 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Yet whether she is obstructing in her role or not, I will raise one family, one gentleman: Alan Black. Alan Black was a workman who was out to work with his colleagues. All of them, bar one, were Protestants. In 1976 in Kingsmill, all bar one were attacked by the IRA. When asked to identify themselves, the one individual who identified himself as a Catholic was allowed to leave. Eleven of Alan’s colleagues were murdered that day for no other reason than that they had a Protestant faith. Alan survived. He went to the police ombudsman looking for answers on the investigation 14 years ago. He had an inquest, which concluded 11 months ago. We hear from the ombudsman’s office that it is ready to report, but, 11 months later, there has still been no outcome, no publication and no report for Alan. Alan is an old man now.”
House of Commons11 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I want to reflect on a number of institutions we have that are supposed to aid justice, truth and reconciliation in Northern Ireland. One of them is the Office of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, which was established to allow members of the community who did not support the police to buy into the police, to get confidence in the police. Yet I am sorry to say in this debate today that we have a police ombudsman in whom I have no confidence—none whatsoever. We have a police ombudsman who constructed the notion of collusion. She was struck down by the courts, so she constructed the notion of collusive behaviours. She was struck down by the courts. More recently, she has been missing in action: she is fit to do the job; she is unfit to do the job; she is being investigated by the West Midlands police herself.”
House of Commons11 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“And the only way you can get truth is if we deny justice.” That is what the legacy Act presented to the people of Northern Ireland. That is why we opposed it. They want justice. They want their day in court. They have had to suffer evasions of justice in Northern Ireland for decades. We did not support the Belfast agreement because of the release of prisoners. We do not support the notion that those who take life could be sentenced for two years—sentenced for much longer, but only have to serve two years. Nor did we support on-the-runs letters. Nor did we support amnesties for terrorists throughout the Labour Government proposals or the Conservative Government proposals, because the approach that denies justice is one that will never allow the wounds to heal.”
House of Commons11 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The right hon. Gentleman knows that I have high regard for him. We explored these issues at great length when he chaired the Defence Committee and I was but a lowly member of it. The truth is that there are hundreds if not thousands of individuals in Northern Ireland who have been prosecuted already. How often do we see them go to meet their victims, or the families of their victims? How often do we see them try to apply balm on the wound that has never healed? And those are the individuals who have received justice. I started to talk about truth and justice before the explosion of interventions. They are important for this debate. For the last number of years, the terminology from this Chamber has been very clearly, “You’re not going to get justice, but we can offer you truth.”
House of Commons11 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is a message that I hope that the Minister will take to the Irish Government about the strength of feeling on this issue. We looked a lot of victims in the eye last week, but we cannot continue, year after year, to look victims in the eyes and say nice things, but offer no hope, offer no truth and offer no justice.”
House of Commons11 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend is absolutely right. At a summit last week, not one word on these issues emerged, save the Irish Government saying they are not yet quite ready to withdraw their challenge against the British Government for the legacy Act. They ruled against an amnesty being provided, just as we did, but they decided to challenge their near neighbours in the British Government through the European courts. They decided to do that without trying to address these issues, yet when the onus is on them—when the shoe is on the other foot—they offer nothing. Just this evening, the Northern Ireland Assembly passed a motion to say that the Irish Government should hold an inquiry into Omagh, and I agree. It was amended by the DUP and unanimously supported by every party in Stormont.”
House of Commons11 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker—I took that intervention because it was a powerful point, and I am grateful for your latitude. I am delighted that the Minister is here this evening. I hope that she responds positively. I hope that she recognises the pain and the anguish, as she herself has met individuals in Northern Ireland. There is a long way to go on providing the answers, the truth and the justice. We will not be found wanting, and I hope the Labour Government will not either.”
House of Commons11 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In welcoming the statement, I reserve judgment on whether we need an additional court—an intermediate court—particularly if it will be resourced from the existing magistrates and Crown court system. Following on from the question from the right hon. Member for Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge (Sir Gavin Williamson), we have a backlog in England and Northern Ireland, and people are on remand for too long. Increasingly, people are being released following a conviction with time served, and there is no opportunity whatsoever for rehabilitation. Will the opportunity to rehabilitate offenders while they are on remand form part of the Brian Leveson review?”
House of Commons5 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Secretary of State asked rhetorically whether the law around inquests needs to change. The coroner had to answer four questions: where, when, who and how. He had no role in trying to answer why, but we know why: four depraved terrorists for the IRA and their warped ideology tried to destroy society and kill in our country. Yesterday, the Defence Secretary was clear when he said that those who served in the SAS that day, “deserve, and they will receive, our fullest support.” —[ Official Report , 10 February 2025; Vol. 762, c. 21.] I will not stand for a rewriting of the past. Does the Secretary of State agree with the Defence Secretary?”
House of Commons11 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I do not believe that the Secretary of State would have intended to mislead the House, but I suspect that he may have misunderstood the point being made, and it has filtered into a number of his subsequent responses. In relation to the coroner and his powers, the point being made was that there are aspects of the judgment released on Thursday that are outwith the coronial law in Northern Ireland and outwith what would be expected of a judicial officer. I give the Secretary of State an opportunity to say not that the coronial law needs to change, but that the judgment does not sit within the remit and powers of the coronial system.”
House of Commons11 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Secretary of State will have heard the exchanges earlier about the grave injustice and slur that was delivered upon SAS personnel in the coroner’s judgment last week, following the incidents in Clonoe. Will the Secretary of State take this opportunity to indicate not only to the House but to service personnel and the nation that he, as Defence Secretary, supports those who bravely served in Northern Ireland and stood on the precipice between peace and tyranny?”
House of Commons10 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Home Secretary may recall that, when she was on the Opposition Benches, I cautioned the then Conservative Government that the actions they were going to take to have a uniform immigration policy throughout the United Kingdom were unsustainable. More particularly, I warned during proceedings on the Illegal Migration Bill that it would conflict with the Windsor framework. They said I was wrong, but the High Court in Belfast has said that we were correct. She is taking steps today to repeal sections of the Illegal Migration Act 2023 and the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024, so will she confirm, as Home Secretary of this United Kingdom, that our immigration policy will run throughout the entirety of this United Kingdom?”
House of Commons10 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will the Prime Minister use his good offices to ensure that truth is delivered and justice arrives for the families of those who so needlessly lost their lives to Irish republican terrorism?”
House of Commons29 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster for their sterling support for Northern Ireland over the past few days in the aftermath of Storm Éowyn, which is greatly appreciated and demonstrates how well the Union works. On 15 August 1998, the fragile peace in Northern Ireland was shattered when the Real IRA detonated a bomb in Omagh town. Twenty-nine people died, and two unborn twins never saw this world. Through the dignity and the stoic campaigning of Michael Gallagher, whose son Aiden died, a public inquiry was secured through the courts, which recommended in 2021 that the Irish Government should similarly hold an inquiry to understand what could have been prevented, given the cross-border nature of the atrocity—the bomb was prepared in and transported from the Irish Republic.”
House of Commons29 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is welcome that the Secretary of State has visited the Spirit AeroSystems site a number of times. He will know of its importance to advanced manufacturing, and of its aeronautical history in Northern Ireland—it originated in 1908 as Short Brothers—and he will also know that at this stage there is a purchaser for about a third of the facility and a third of the staff. The current plan fails to recognise not only the integration of the units within Spirit AeroSystems, but its importance to the Northern Ireland supply chain. Will the Secretary of State join Unite and GMB in their call for the Government to support a one-sale solution, so that the integration of staff, work flows and supply chains continues to benefit for decades to come?”
House of Commons15 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Can the Secretary of State indicate his endeavour to ensure that that viability will be at the forefront of his mind, so that we can deliver the fleet solid support ships in Belfast and Devon?”
House of Commons15 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Secretary of State will know that the facility would not be there had it not been for Government investment and support. Guarantees were given not just to the people of Belfast, but to the staff directly employed at Spirit AeroSystems. The Government have also engaged in discussions about Harland and Wolff and Navantia, and the fleet solid support ships. The Secretary of State will share the concern that I felt yesterday about the news that the four Harland and Woolf shipyards across the United Kingdom would be going into administration, and he will know of the countless businesses throughout the UK that are owed tens of millions of pounds in respect of the work on those fleet solid support ships. We want their viability to continue, and we know of individual businesses that have been family-owned for generations and have succeeded.”
House of Commons15 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend mentions information that should be shared, and accountability. What about transparency in commissioning? He has raised this issue on a number of occasions over the years. Is he satisfied that there is transparency in the commissioning process? Is there opportunity and fairness in the process, or is there a greater opportunity to inject transparency through the charter review?”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I had not intended to intervene on the hon. and learned Gentleman, but on that point, Invest Northern Ireland, the body charged with encouraging foreign direct investment into Northern Ireland and with growing our economy, cannot point to one example of business investing in Northern Ireland as a direct result of the Windsor framework.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They voted for it in this House back in February, and they did so because they recognised the constitutional implications that checks were having and the practical frustrations they were causing consumers in Northern Ireland.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“However, whenever agreement was reached earlier this year, the “Safeguarding the Union” paper outlined a number of stepping stones to a better place. The Minister and her colleagues present voted in favour of that agreement. They recognised the recurring issues in Northern Ireland, and the harm that those issues were causing the people of Northern Ireland and consumers, no matter the constitutional outlook. If constitutional principles are not shared, it harms ordinary people in Northern Ireland. They voted for solutions on an interim basis—a stepping-stone approach—to move these issues forward. Where are we on that today? What is the Government’s position on eradicating routine checks within the UK’s internal market system?”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Although over the intervening years there have been a few crossed paths, a few cross words and the odd crossed sword, I suspect that it is good, fitting and encouraging for people at home that today we are speaking with one voice about these issues. I say to the Minister and to the hon. Member for Bootle that one of the best ways to deal with the issues raised by the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim and me, and supported by colleagues in their own remarks, is to honour agreements that have been reached. When the hon. and learned Member said in his remarks that it seemed as if the people of Northern Ireland were being asked to “suck it up,” the Minister said from a sedentary position—I hope she will not fall out with me for sharing this—“No, we fight to maintain the Union.” [ Interruption. ] She is agreeing.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I stand not only as leader of my party and my colleagues, but as a co-sponsor of the hon. Member’s Bill. I commend him on the position that he has outlined to the Chamber today and on his success in the private Member’s Bill ballot. He is not a gambler—anyone who listens to him will know that he will put forward his principled position without fear or favour—but he took a chance and he has this opportunity. I commend him on doing so in a collective and cohesive way that has allowed for greater co-operation not just from those in Northern Ireland, but from across the country. He should be commended for that. The hon. Member and I embarked on this journey in the same position as we approached the 2016 vote.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Member did exactly what he was asked to do, but when considering these issues, I am not sure just how constructive that will prove to be. The hon. Gentleman said in his remarks that we will be able to deal with issues as time goes by. I have watched “As Time Goes By” on repeat on UKTV Gold, and I have watched people in this Chamber say that we will deal with these issues “as time go by”. Here is an opportunity to engage in the concerns that the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim (Jim Allister) raised, having received support from across the Unionist spectrum in Northern Ireland to raise them. Yet, as time goes by, though it is said that we shall not be dismissed or demeaned in the position that we are putting forward, that is exactly what is happening.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will respond in, hopefully, the same tone and say that it is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Bootle (Peter Dowd). I suspect there is a big prize for him waiting in the Government Whips Office after this debate. He welcomed every intervention going. I do not besmirch his character at all, but since he suggested that there is interest in the concerns being raised by the Unionist community, I reflect that with almost two hours left of a five-hour debate, I am the third speaker. Scores of Members from Northern Ireland on both sides of the Chamber will probably not get the opportunity to make their point and represent their constituents, because of a quest to make sure that the Bill is talked out. I say, respectfully, that the hon.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I agree with the right hon. Gentleman, and I am grateful to him for co-sponsoring the Bill and being present today. He is right: the people who say in this or other debates that we cannot change what is written in tablets of stone are of the very party that was, from 1998, part of securing the Good Friday agreement, which was worked on in a political way, with parties in Northern Ireland, including my own, and changed time and again through processes at Leeds castle, the St Andrews agreement and the Northern Ireland (St Andrews Agreement) Act 2006. The very arguments that they are deploying against change ignore the fact that they have a history of doing exactly the same thing—particularly on the Belfast agreement, which they often suggest is written in tablets of stone.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Member for Walthamstow (Ms Creasy) was. We raised concerns, but we were ignored. So when people stand up in 2024 and say, “Why are we still talking about an issue that started in 2016?”, it is because Members on both sides of the House did not listen to the warnings, the concerns, and the opportunities for compromise and agreement. Moreover, in repeating the same approach today, we are storing up greater potential for frustration in the future.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Friend the Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) is bringing in thread, wool and felt from Etsy to make craft, I defy any Member to stand up and indicate how that will have a material impact on the integrity of the single market. I defy any Member to stand up and give me an example—other than from “The Lord of the Rings”—of where a tree has come from GB to NI and been planted, and has then got up and walked across the border. It does not happen, yet we are told that sending a tree from Stranraer to Belfast would destroy the sanitary and phytosanitary integrity of the single market. It is a nonsense. We are having to live with, and try to work through, the practical solutions to the overarching imposition that this Parliament agreed to, in spite of the concerns raised by people like me who were here during the Brexit years, as the hon.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“and learned Member for North Antrim has also included in the Bill aspects on customs and parcels—another commitment made back in February and supported by the Labour Government. It was to be implemented in October this year, but they delayed it. The Minister and Members should know that we did not get overly exercised by the delay, because we recognise that it will be implemented by the end of the financial year. However, owing to the practicalities, the fact that attention was diverted because of the general election and all the rest, it did not happen in October. It is happening, which is good, but it is being done in a way that recognises the overarching imposition that we have from relationships that are totally unnecessary. If the business run by the constituent of my hon.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is a fair point, and illustrates the requirement to honour the agreement—supported by the Minister and her Labour colleagues back in February—to eradicate routine checks within the UK internal market system. Does that deal with all the issues? No, it does not. Does it deal with what is in the red lane? No, it does not. Does it deal with the constitutional impurity of the overarching framework? No, it does not. But is it a step forward? Does it remove the frustration of my constituents and those of the hon. Member for Belfast South and Mid Down (Claire Hanna), who does not share my constitutional outlook? Yes, it does, and it should have been delivered in October. The hon.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will not give way to the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent South (Dr Gardner), because I am giving way to the hon. Member for Walthamstow (Ms Creasy).”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“At what point is it OK for it to step in? At what point should Northern Ireland be disenfranchised before our sovereign Government and our sovereign Parliament will take steps to protect the consumer interests of the people of Northern Ireland? We do not know, but what we do know is that even when they have been prepared to engage in discussions that are of practical benefit to the people of Northern Ireland to resolve these issues—and Labour supported those—there has not been full and faithful implementation. It is not governed by the Vienna convention, but we are not seeing that full and faithful implementation.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We have heard every hue and cry from drinks manufacturers and food manufacturers across the United Kingdom, who have said that this is costly and will cause them difficulty, yet Asda, Sainsbury’s and Tesco simply put it on their best-before date line. It costs them nothing, but what does it ensure? No divergence of trade within our own country. What does it ensure? Access to the Northern Ireland market and the removal of a disincentive. What have we heard? The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has no interest in honouring the very aspect of the agreement that Labour supported back in February. It is now saying, “Yes, we will take the power, but we will not use it, unless—”. Unless what? It is repudiating a commitment from an agreement that it supported, but it will not say what is the trigger point.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will not respond to the hon. Lady’s last line; I will leave it to others to determine. She and I have engaged with each other—sometimes helpfully, and sometimes crossly—for years. When there are opportunities to work together to benefit my constituency or anybody else’s in the United Kingdom, I will do it. What I am actually doing at the moment is sharing agreements that were reached. She and her colleagues voted for them, yet we are still waiting for their implementation. Let me give another one: an agreement outlined in “Safeguarding the Union” required a labelling regime across the United Kingdom. The reason for that was that there were no cost implications or benefits for businesses in Scotland, England and Wales if they simply chose not to supply our market in Northern Ireland.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We were right, but it is wrong that a trading agreement should have any impact whatever on the ability of this sovereign Parliament to set a uniform immigration policy across the whole United Kingdom. It was wrong then, and I am glad that the Secretary of State on Wednesday night indicated that that is a ground of appeal that the Government are bringing forward, because it is wrong.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Member for Walthamstow was right that we worked on this and we talked about this, but let me be very clear: whenever I stood up in this Chamber on behalf of my colleagues as our spokesman on home affairs to say that I would not vote for the Illegal Migration Act 2023, it was not because I did not think there was an issue with immigration. I do. It was not because I was ill-prepared to support Government in their endeavours. I was prepared to do so. I said this in this Chamber and my colleagues supported me: it was because, though the Government said that the provisions would apply in Northern Ireland, we were indicating that they would not. The very same people who told me that the immigration legislation would apply in Northern Ireland launched a leadership campaign on the back of the arguments I was making afterward.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“No one on this side of the Chamber is indicating that we should leave, through this argument, the European convention on human rights, nor that we should replace the Human Rights Act 1998, which embeds those commitments in our domestic legislation. The argument being raised on article 2 of the Windsor framework is that what has been presented as an international treaty, an agreement and a resolution on trade is impacting and frustrating the ability of this sovereign Parliament because of how the courts in Northern Ireland are interpreting the provisions on myriad areas outside trade. Immigration is a classic example. The hon.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a matter of fact that we do not have an all-island economy; we have strands within our economy that operate on a cross-border basis in the context of two legal jurisdictions, two tax jurisdictions, two currency jurisdictions, two VAT jurisdictions and two regulatory jurisdictions, unless covered under annex 2 of the protocol. We do not have an all-island economy. It is a superfluous piece of legislation that is drawn out of the joint report from 2017, and it should go. It should go because I say so; it should go because it was agreed under the Windsor framework, which is quickly forgotten and ignored. We have talked about article 2 in this debate.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Let me remind the House that it is only in “Safeguarding the Union” because it features in the Windsor framework. Much of the approach from the Government Benches seems to amount to “We cannot achieve anything with the European Union unless we demonstrate our trust and our integrity—or our servitude!—to the European Union.” Paragraph 53 of the Windsor framework indicates very clearly that there is no need to have a legal due regard to an all-island economy that does not exist. Anyone who stands up here today and talks about their full-throated support for the Windsor framework should read what paragraph 53 has to say about the all-island economy.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“When Boris Johnson engaged with this issue, in respect of the protocol, he went to the Wirral for a walkabout in a wedding venue with Leo Varadkar, and became smitten with Leo. He ditched the democratic consent principles in section 4(5) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 to which the hon. and learned Gentleman has referred. It was always part of the preceding arrangements that a consent vote in Northern Ireland would adhere to the consent principles in the Belfast agreement, and Boris Johnson ditched them. In “Safeguarding the Union”, there was a commitment to remove and repeal a legacy provision in section 10(1)(b) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, on having due regard to an all-island economy—a commitment that Labour supported, but now repudiate because it is in “Safeguarding the Union”.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My right hon. Friend is entirely correct. What have we achieved over the last five years? A game, and not a very enjoyable game, of whack-a-mole, for it is about as strategic as whack-a-mole. An issue comes up involving the VAT margin schemes for second-car salesmen; we find a solution. Then another issue pops up, and another, and another. Whack-a-mole! That is the best strategic approach that this Government, and the previous Government, have adopted to deal with issues that are affecting us because of the decision taken back in 2019. I remember the parliamentary discourse about the quest for agreement, but I know this. When the previous Prime Minister, Boris Johnson— [Interruption.] Just let me finish. No need for your wee quips.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I hope, if I agree to allow the hon. Member for Walthamstow to intervene once more, and once more only, that she will agree that it is right to sort that issue, too.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is not just immigration that has been encroached because of article 2 of the Windsor framework, but legacy, which was the basis on which the Secretary of State raised this issue on Wednesday night. The legacy of our troubled past is an important issue, and it has absolutely nothing to do with international trade or trade within our own country—yet here is a case predicated on article 2 of the Windsor framework, which is frustrating this Parliament’s ability to legislate on that issue. That cannot be right. [ Interruption. ] Is the hon. Member for Belfast South and Mid Down seeking to intervene, or is she just waving supportively?”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Our judiciary are independent from the Government as well, as she knows. At first instance, in the High Court in Northern Ireland, citizens can draw upon legal jurisprudence within the European system without needing to go to the final arbitrary appeal of a third party. She knows that. The hon. Lady and I have parsed the course on many occasions. Despite all the suggestions made by Members, when challenged, that they are prepared to engage in the debate on this legislation or on the wider issues affecting Northern Ireland seriously, earnestly and with a willingness to resolve problems, there have been an awful lot of giggling Gerties and Cyril Sneers across the Chamber. There has been an awful lot of dismissal of concerns that have not been raised for the first time today—they have been raised on many, many occasions.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Paymaster General knows as well as I do that the European Union does not see this process concluding within the next two or three years. I do not think it is appropriate or acceptable for the people of Northern Ireland to wait so long. The Paymaster General has not indicated what the content of his agreement should look like, nor the content he would like to achieve. I understand that this week—only this week, some six months into government—he has written to the devolved Administrations asking for ideas as to what that process would look like; only this week, six months in, for a key plank of the Government’s approach to resetting their relationship with the EU. That is simply not acceptable.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Let me say very clearly to Government Members who think that such an agreement is the answer to all of our problems: it is not. There is a world in which that process could provide solutions and get equilibrium across the United Kingdom on SPS issues alone. However, nobody has yet said that that will see the removal of the overarching framework that is causing the imposition; nobody has once suggested that once reached, all the legislative requirements and the constitutional and practical impositions would dissolve. Nobody has suggested that, and that is problematic. The fact that the agreement would be a single solution for SPS and would not touch on any of the other areas of law is problematic. However, what is most fundamental?”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am sharing with Members present that when we make progress and make achievements, we want to see them implemented, and there is no trust or honour earned when those agreements are breached or not fulfilled. We are invited to wait for an SPS agreement. I just want to be very clear that in a debate such as today’s, on the Windsor framework and the EU withdrawal Bill that the hon. and learned Member has presented, the Paymaster General should be here. The Paymaster General, who has been charged by the Prime Minister to engage with the European Union and resolve these issues, should be in this Chamber. I greatly respect the Minister present, but some of the issues being raised are for the Paymaster General. It is he who intends to go and secure this SPS agreement.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I regard the hon. Lady as well, as she knows. She has made that point now on two occasions, and she is free to do so. I want to come back to the SPS point that has been raised on a number of occasions. Here I stand as a Unionist Member of Parliament from Northern Ireland, having engaged on these issues for the past eight years, as have my colleagues in this place, whether recently or over the same period of time—nobody sitting behind me has a shorter political career than I do; in fact, almost all have a much longer political career. We have engaged on these issues because we have been trying to find solutions that work for the people of Northern Ireland. Sometimes that causes discord among us. Sometimes the best tactical way of achieving that does not meet unanimity or agreement.”
House of Commons6 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗