YouSaid · the spoken record
Andrew Griffith
Lines from Political Thinking with Nick Robinson have been withdrawn from this page while we check who is speaking. See the correction.
On the record 2020–2026
hansard
This is everything the corpus holds for Andrew Griffith. It is not everything they have said on the record.
Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections
“To date, how much has the Department spent, or how much has it committed to underwrite—that is a straightforward question that deserves an answer? Given that her Department had no budget for revenue support of steel, has the Minister been able to secure additional funds from the Treasury, so that other sectors or support for British exporters do not pay the price? We have seen no further detail of the Government’s proposed steel strategy, or any confirmation of longer-term plans to protect British steelmaking. Labour Members refused to back a coking coalmine to produce some of the raw materials that blast furnaces rely on. Instead, they wait for shipments to arrive from halfway around the world. Most importantly, the Government have not set out how they intend to reduce the enormous burden of sky-high energy costs.”
House of Commons22 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Instead of a statement from the Treasury today, the Chancellor is running to the International Monetary Fund in Washington to explain how she broke the UK economy. Steel nationalisation, the IMF downgrading growth forecasts, trade union summits in No.10—it is all sounding a bit 1970s. The simple problem is that we do not know the answers to any of these questions because the Government have failed to publish an impact assessment. Will the Minister confirm to the House when they plan to do so? Has anyone in government asked the Office for National Statistics whether British Steel will now be classified as a publicly owned entity? Has the ministerial team discussed the impact of the takeover with the Chancellor on her already evaporated fiscal headroom?”
House of Commons22 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Minister for advance sight of her statement, and I join her in thanking the Scunthorpe workers for their efforts over the last few weeks. We are here once again because the Government had no plan—they failed to prepare, they bungled negotiations, and they took too long to listen to the warnings. What do we have to show for it? We have this botched nationalisation and a potential bill for the taxpayer stretching into the billions. I say billions, but it remains entirely unclear how much this bungled 11th-hour decision will cost, while the assets still belong to China. I hope that Members across the House will agree that this is a complete mockery of transparency and accountability, and I hope that the relevant Select Committees will take it upon themselves to conduct their own inquiries.”
House of Commons22 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This is a failure on the Government’s watch. Let us be crystal clear what today means: we are entering a tunnel with only one exit. This is a botched nationalisation plan, revealing that the Government have no plan. In government, we acted to secure Port Talbot and we were negotiating a plan, including British Steel’s preferred option of an electric arc furnace on Teesside, which would have limited job losses and kept Scunthorpe running in transition. Once again, when Labour negotiates, Britain loses—the Chagos islands, US tariffs, the train drivers and now this latest crisis. A bad toolmaker blames his tools, but this time the Government have only themselves to blame.”
House of Commons12 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Secretary of State for taking the time to brief me last night ahead of today’s sitting, and for advance sight of his speech. To fail to prepare is to prepare to fail. What a way to proceed: recalling Parliament for only the sixth occasion since the end of the second world war to debate a Bill published only 90 minutes ago. This would be conduct unbecoming of a parish council. Our country, our economy and this Parliament all deserve better. That is why the amendment in my name would at least put a sunset on the Bill, and I hope the Government will accept it. Today is not a failure by the steelworkers of Scunthorpe and elsewhere, their families or the community. They have toiled for generations to ensure that we have the primary steel we need for our structures, our safety and our security.”
House of Commons12 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will talk about the difficulties facing steel around the world, but let us just be clear what is happening today: the British people must not have lost their winter fuel allowance and their disability benefits in order that China can walk away from its liabilities, leaving British taxpayers to pick up the bills. Steel needs energy, and energy needs steel. No one denies that steelmaking has been difficult for some time, but Scunthorpe is the victim of a dishonesty that pretends it is better for the environment to ship coke halfway around the planet than from down the road, and of an energy policy that has driven costs higher than in any competing nation. No one is more responsible for this than the Energy Secretary and the Prime Minister who appointed him.”
House of Commons12 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My right hon. Friend is absolutely right. It is sad to say that Scunthorpe is the victim of exactly that policy: putting ideology before British interests.”
House of Commons12 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will make some progress. Millions of other businesses are also struggling with their energy bills, which is why the Chancellor’s tax choices have been so devastating. Steel may be the first domino to topple, but glass, chemicals, cars and concrete are other industries at risk. Does the Prime Minister envisage a whole series of Saturday sittings, or will he change course today and cut energy costs now, and not in 10 years’ time when it is too late?”
House of Commons12 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition has made it extremely clear that the deal was being negotiated, and the point about it being negotiated is that it would have been concluded after the election.”
House of Commons12 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Despite years to prepare, it is clear that the Government came into office with no plan. There is no steel strategy, there is no industrial strategy, there is no export strategy, and now we have this botched nationalisation. The Secretary of State says that his preference is to find a commercial partner, but let us be serious. Do the Government think that is likely, after attacking business with a £25 billion jobs tax and his Bill to create the most hostile environment for employers since the 1970s? On the Chancellor’s watch, in case she has not noticed, all the flow is of investors leaving this country.”
House of Commons12 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will make some progress. It did not need to be this way. My hon. Friend the Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers) has been warning of a growing threat since last September. The Mayor of Tees Valley has been asking the Government to present their plan for steel for months. Rob Waltham, the leader of North Lincolnshire council, has done all he can to support steelmaking in Scunthorpe. And, on 4 April, Ed Conway of Sky News showed the world that we were just days away from the risk of the furnaces shutting down. But the Government did not listen and they did not act. It has been almost 10 days since Parliament last debated substantive Government business. Rather than this rushed, one minute to midnight Bill, we could have used that time for proper debate, proper process and proper scrutiny. This is indefensible incompetence.”
House of Commons12 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am not surprised that the hon. Lady is a little confused; as I said, the Government have failed to lay out their plan and to afford this House the opportunity to debate it. Everything that we have heard this morning says that the Government have not really thought this through. Steelmaking is complex, intense and highly operational. Iron ore has to reach thousands of degrees to become molten iron. It is a dangerous process that poses a serious risk to health. In Birmingham, Labour struggle to collect the bins—”
House of Commons12 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“What disrespect it shows to this House for the Government to come along today, having recalled Parliament, after nine months of failing to land a deal, and ask us for a blank cheque. That is no way to run a corner shop, let alone the country. Has anyone in Government asked the Office for National Statistics—”
House of Commons12 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Sit down. From midnight, the Chancellor will be standing behind the payroll, settling every bill with every supplier, even if they are in arrears. If these decisions no longer sit with the plant owner, where does the buck stop? Old Admiralty Building? The Treasury? No. 10? How can other steel providers have any confidence in the impartiality of the Government’s steel strategy if the umpire is now on the pitch? What assessment have the Government made of the impact of the Bill on public finances? There is no impact assessment. The Government have been talking to British Steel for nine months. They have put at least £500 million of taxpayers’ money on the table. Surely by now, the Business Secretary and his officials have a comprehensive understanding of the cost of the actions that he is asking us to vote for.”
House of Commons12 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will take an intervention if someone wants to answer this question: has anyone in Government asked the ONS whether, as a result of the powers that are being taken in this Bill, from today British Steel will be classified as publicly owned, whether it has been formally nationalised or not? No answers.”
House of Commons12 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“There we are: a disrespect of this House; the Government treating Parliament with disdain; nine months of dither and delay; and a botched nationalisation of steelmaking, with the British taxpayer on the hook. It is crystal clear that when Labour negotiates, Britain loses. This is not a serious Government. It is a Government shaped by events, not in control of them. It is government by sulky teenager—not sharing their plans, not answering the question, and when it goes wrong, it is everyone’s fault but theirs.”
House of Commons12 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Disappointingly, there was no answer to my important question about the ONS and whether this asset will sit on the Government’s balance sheet. Perhaps when the Minister winds up, he will provide an answer to that important question that affects the nation’s finances. The markets know, the world knows and we know that the Chancellor’s headroom was inadequate from the very moment that she sat down after her last emergency Budget. Only this week, the Bank of England took the unprecedented step of cancelling the planned sale of Government bonds. Today’s botched nationalisation will further unsettle international markets. When will the Chancellor be presenting her next emergency Budget, and what are her plans to update the markets?”
House of Commons12 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Can he reassure us that, in the event the UK did see a major trade distortion in Northern Ireland, the Government would be prepared, if necessary, to trigger article 16 of the Windsor framework? Will he reassure the House that any concessions to UK tech giants on the digital services tax will not simply shift the burden to the United Kingdom’s small businesses? The Conservatives are on the side of business and Britain. We understand the gravity of the situation, and we will support the Government where they act in the national interest. I hope that they will take this moment seriously, get back around the table with their US counter- parts and involve the House in their deliberations.”
House of Commons3 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will he assure us that any deal will back British farmers and food producers and uphold our high environmental protection and animal welfare standards, which we have enhanced and upheld in the agreements that we have reached since leaving the EU? Will the Secretary of State now surge additional resources for exporters, reallocating resources across Government to fund a new version of the UK trade show programme and enlarge the GREAT campaign? What consideration are the Government giving to the special situation of Northern Ireland? Will he guarantee that all claims under the duty reimbursement scheme for Northern Ireland will be paid promptly and the Government will commit additional resources when required?”
House of Commons3 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The cost of failure is too high, the burdens on business are too great and time is too precious, the Secretary of State must act and act fast. Let me conclude with some questions for the Secretary of State on behalf of all our constituents. Will he publish an urgent assessment of the impact of today’s tariffs on the UK economy so that the markets can see whether the Chancellor’s emergency Budget sums still add up, or whether she will be back for more taxes? When will he give the car makers the clarity they need on the ZEV—zero emission vehicle—mandate? Will he undertake to keep Parliament informed and to publish the UK’s broader objectives—not its negotiating strategy, but the broader objectives—in these trade negotiations with the UK, precisely as the previous Government did in March 2020?”
House of Commons3 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“No wonder business confidence remains at rock bottom. To help British exporters survive, the Government must urgently tackle our sky-high energy costs. A business in Birmingham, west midlands, faces energy costs that are four times those of its competitors in Birmingham, Alabama in the US. That dwarfs the impact of tariffs and is no basis on which to compete. The Secretary of State was responsible for the Employment Rights Bill, which will hit businesses so hard that the OBR has not even begun to assess how much it will hurt the economy. Now is the time, today is the day for the Secretary of State to walk back to his Department and, in the national interest, instruct his officials to shelve the Employment Rights Bill. He should put ideology aside, put the unions on hold and put the Government on the side of British business.”
House of Commons3 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If Labour and the Liberal Democrats had their way, we would still be in the EU. As the Prime Minister acknowledged this morning, thousands of British jobs have been saved today as the result. I hope that he and his colleagues had the decency to regret the 48 times that they voted to stay in Europe, and to thank us for getting Brexit done. Last week, the OBR warned that these tariffs could knock up to 1% off GDP. We are already in a per capita recession and markets are falling this morning. It is businesses that create jobs and grow our economy, yet, at every turn, the Government have piled on headwinds when they need our support. They put a tax on jobs, more than doubled business rates for many, introduced the family business death tax and are barrelling ahead with flawed recycling charges.”
House of Commons3 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Government, sadly, got no special favours from the White House last night. The Secretary of State refers to vindication. This is no vindication at all. We are in precisely the same band as the Congo, Costa Rica, Kosovo and Christmas Island. In fact, I can count more than 125 countries and territories that have the same US tariff levels as we now do—not that special. Our automotive manufacturers face unchanged tariffs of 25% on around £8 billion-worth of cars and auto parts exports. Steel and aluminium exports remain at 25% and, on a volume-weighted basis, our exports face an average tariff of closer to 13%. Above all, last night was a vindication of those who were pilloried and abused for wanting our country to have the freedom to decide our own trade policy.”
House of Commons3 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of his statement. Businesses, workers and their families woke up this morning with greater fear and more uncertainty about their future. Tariffs make us all poorer by pushing up costs, suppressing demand and making the pound in our pocket buy less of the things we need. It is free trade to which we owe our past prosperity, and free trade that has lifted billions out of poverty since the second world war. This is a moment for calm words and cool heads, and we will support the Government when they do sensible things to reverse the impacts on our already fragile economy. I am glad they have recommitted to reaching a deal with our closest ally and largest single country trading partner. However, this is also a moment for honesty and telling the truth.”
House of Commons3 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This Bill is no exception. Although it professes to simplify our regulatory framework, the reality is that this is an EU Trojan horse of a Bill, which will sabotage our Brexit freedoms, undermine the integrity of the United Kingdom, disrespect Parliament, befuddle British business with uncertainty and take us back to being a Brussels rule-taker—all from a party that voted 48 times to overturn the will of the British people.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move an amendment, to leave out from “That” to the end of the Question and add: “this House declines to give a Second Reading to the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill [Lords] because it will provide for regulatory alignment with the European Union, and it has been condemned three times by the House of Lords Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee as a skeleton Bill which provides, without justification, inappropriately wide powers for Ministers to re-write the regulatory regimes for product safety and the weights and measures of goods by regulations.” Too often when the public think of Parliament, they think of out-of-touch power and bad laws. The Bill is the archetype of everything that is wrong with Westminster. There should be an unwritten rule in this postcode: never trust a Bill with a convoluted name.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Had the Opposition not fought back, the power to crush the British pint would have rested on the whim of a Minister’s pen. Welcome though that U-turn is, let us not ignore the fact that the Labour Government wanted to give themselves the power in the first place.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will not, but before I get into further— [ Interruption. ] I will say something nice about the right hon. Gentleman in a minute. Before I get into detail, let me welcome the Government’s U-turn on their plan to scrap the great British pint. Let us hope that that is the first of many. When I raised that on 26 February, Labour Members described it as “a conspiracy theory”. The hon. Member for St Albans (Daisy Cooper) said it was “scaremongering”, and the Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury, the hon. Member for Ealing North (James Murray), said that an amendment was no more needed than a “law to say that the sun must rise in the morning.” —[ Official Report , 26 February 2025; Vol. 762, c. 812.] The truth is that the Government were caught red-handed trying to ditch our British pint by this back-door Bill.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Labour motive is all too plain to see. This is a Labour party that voted 48 times to reject the will of the British people, led by the Prime Minister, who sought a second referendum to overturn that will. I accept that the hon. Member for Birmingham Northfield was not in the House at the time, but he might want to spend some time with his colleagues in the Tea Room and hear precisely what happened.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“No, I will make some progress. The anti-pub, anti-hospitality agenda goes far beyond this Bill. The jobs tax, the threshold change, the attack on seasonal and flexible working, the more than doubling of business rates, the war on pub banter and the garden smoking ban are all from this Government. Our hospitality industry—the Secretary of State is smirking—deserves infinitely better than this from this Government.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Once again, the Secretary of State has failed to engage on the key issue, which is that British businesses— [Interruption.] It is not funny. British businesses are bleeding out, business confidence is at a record low, unemployment is rising, and all the Government have to talk about is the past, not what they are currently delivering.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“No one who considered that speech could fail to agree. The Lords’ Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee has slammed the Bill not once, not twice, but three times, including after the Government’s changes were made. To put this into context, the wide powers contained in this 15-page Bill will allow Ministers unilaterally to amend product safety regulation, impose obligations on online marketplaces, meddle with standards for weights and measures or entirely align British regulatory standards with the European Union, posing a threat to the integrity of the UK internal market. It is 15 pages of the most egregious Whitehall overreach.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Let me move on. The biggest flaw of many in this Bill is that, as the hon. Member for Blackley and Middleton South (Graham Stringer) and my right hon. Friend the Member for Beverley and Holderness (Graham Stuart) have both identified, it hands over too much power with too little accountability. There is “a real need to consider the balance between primary and secondary legislation, which in recent years has weighed too heavily in favour of delegated powers…excessive reliance on delegated powers, Henry VIII clauses, or skeleton legislation—” such as this Bill— “upsets the proper balance between Parliament and the executive.” Those are not my words, but those of the Attorney General. They are taken from a speech that he made in October, while in government, about the importance of restoring parliamentary sovereignty.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My right hon. Friend makes a serious and important point. I take the Secretary of State in good faith when he says that he desires for his Government to grow the economy—every Government should, and I believe that this Government should as well—but he must recognise that every single action he takes will take us further away from that goal by piling on the red tape and increasing the level of tax. The regulatory jeopardy in this Bill will do the same, by simply making it impossible to know what product regulations will look like. How can any business plan for the future when the powers offered up by the Bill introduce such a prospect of unpredictable regulatory change?”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“With the very best will in the world, I think the hon. Lady can do a great deal better than that. As hon. Members have said, this House can legislate. If there are dangerous products, bring those use cases here, and I believe that across the House we will legislate rapidly to protect our constituents’ safety. However, our constituents did not send us here to pass a 15-page Bill full of skeleton powers to give the Secretary of State an unlimited ability to regulate without having to consult this place.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am genuinely intrigued, and I shall sit here and listen to the hon. Lady’s speech later on. Does she want divergence? Does she want us to use our Brexit freedoms, or does she seek to go back to being a rule taker and converge? We have not heard a compelling argument from the Secretary of State today as to why these powers should be granted. It is right that we in this House adopt the precautionary principle, and if the Secretary of State, or the Minister in winding up, can give us some more compelling use cases, I am sure we would consider that.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My right hon. Friend makes the perfect point that this is precisely what the road to serfdom looks like, whether it is serfdom to an individual Minister at a moment in time or serfdom to an unelected Brussels bureaucratic elite. Why would we give up the powers of this House, the reason why we are sent here, and the ability to hold the Government to account?”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The right hon. Gentleman is exactly right, and we can contrast the number of references to the European Union throughout the Bill with, for example, our biggest single country trading partner—the United States.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On behalf of my right hon. Friend the Member for South West Wiltshire (Dr Murrison), I thank the Secretary of State for intervening. It is important that we legislate with full understanding of what the law says, but the point still stands on the overweighting of references to EU standards versus comparable standards from the United States and Commonwealth friends of this great nation.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We are having the proper debate through these interventions that perhaps we should have had when the Secretary of State was introducing the Bill. That illustrates the point about putting a vast amount of ambiguity—even if it is well intentioned—into the law and how things will operate, and for a reason of which we know not. If there are instances of, for example, e-scooters catching fire in people’s halls, this House has the ability to legislate, and legislate fast where necessary, against those particular harms at that particular moment in time. My right hon. Friend, with his many years of experience in this House, understands that point, and I think that was what he was saying.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Chancellor’s emergency Budget will not have lasted a single week because she made no provision for the imposition of tariffs—if that is indeed what is to come. It is frankly outrageous that the Government have failed to make a statement about where we are, despite the Prime Minister’s official spokesman briefing the Lobby, and the Business and Trade Secretary himself finding time this morning to conduct a round of media interviews. If the Secretary of State would like to comment on the progress of US talks, I will happily give way.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Member makes exactly the right point. This is a blank cheque Bill and a Trojan horse Bill. It is simply not clear under this Secretary of State, or any Secretary of State in the future once these powers have been ceded by this place, how they will be implemented. There is a real asymmetry in the constant litany of references to the European Union—a valued trading partners of ours, but only one valued trading partner of ours, as I hope the Secretary of State is about to reveal over the coming days. Tomorrow we understand that tariffs will be imposed by the United States on British exporters. If that is the case, that would be the worst failure of trade policy for a generation. It is businesses, jobs and our economy that will all pay the price.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Of course, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am nearing a conclusion in any case. However, I do think that the issue of product safety—the rules and regulations that govern our economy, as the Secretary of State himself said—is intrinsically linked with trade, mutual recognition and growing the economy by removing trade frictions and barriers rather than erecting them and subjecting businesses to the tyranny of simply not understanding the corpus of rules and regulations.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My right hon. Friend makes an important point. I hope, as the Secretary of State slightly alluded to in his remarks about the ability of a country to make its own rules and regulations, that we will soon be back in the House with a Government statement at which we can celebrate the mother of all Brexit benefits: securing the ability to conduct our own trade. I look forward to hearing from the Liberal Democrats exactly how much they welcome that ability on behalf of their constituents.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We will not accept any lessons from the Liberal Democrats about what it takes to Brexit successfully and go back to being an independent nation, but if that is what the hon. Lady will speak about, I look forward to hearing it. To conclude, the Bill is flawed in so many ways. With the best will in the world, Ministers should not be proposing it, particularly given their failure so far to protect us from US tariffs. It is a bad Bill from a Government who are already failing. It is a travesty for anyone who cares about respect for parliamentary democracy and the role of this House versus Ministers. It is, as I said, a Trojan horse Bill that will sabotage our Brexit freedoms and take us back to being an EU rule taker, which the British people had long put behind us. I urge the House to back our reasoned amendment and end this terrible Bill.”
House of Commons1 April 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“How have we got to this point? After 35 weeks as Trade Secretary, 18 weeks since the US election, and an entire month since steel and aluminium tariffs were first announced, the Secretary of State is only now going to sit down with the Secretary of Commerce of our closest ally. While he has been correcting his CV, steelworkers and businesses are hurting today. This is a colossal failure of trade policy on his watch. Why has it taken so long, and when can we expect an agreement?”
House of Commons13 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Once again, no answers come there forth. Over 1 million jobs in this country depend on trade with the United States, including thousands of jobs in our steel industry. The Secretary of State does not know when he is going to get a deal. Will he publish his red lines for that deal, his objectives and what he hopes to achieve from meetings next week?”
House of Commons13 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We disagree on much, but it would be churlish of me not to recognise that today represents a personal victory for the Deputy Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Ashton-under-Lyne (Angela Rayner). While the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, the right hon. Member for Stalybridge and Hyde (Jonathan Reynolds) and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the right hon. Member for Leeds West and Pudsey (Rachel Reeves) lie low, there is no doubt who has been in the driving seat. [ Interruption. ] Well, he is now. He’s here now. It is very— [ Interruption. ]”
House of Commons12 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Before I summarise the Opposition’s view on the Bill, I pay tribute to those on the Conservative Benches who contributed during its passage. My hon. Friend the Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith) has held the Government to account with forensic skill on Report and in Committee. He was joined in the Bill Committee by my hon. Friends the Members for West Suffolk (Nick Timothy), for Bridgwater (Sir Ashley Fox) and for Mid Leicestershire (Mr Bedford), and my hon. Friends the Members for Bognor Regis and Littlehampton (Alison Griffiths) and for Dumfries and Galloway (John Cooper) performed great service as members of the Select Committee. I also acknowledge the work of officials in the Department and in Parliament. Their job cannot have been easy, given the indecent haste with which the Bill has been produced.”
House of Commons12 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Just wait until he sees the higher unemployment, higher prices and lower growth that the Bill will bring. [ Interruption. ]”
House of Commons12 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗