Trade Bill
Public Bill Committee, 23 January 2018.
Examination of Witnesses
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
I am trade envoy to the Nordic and Baltic nations, and to Brazil.
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Nick Ashton-Hart, how easy will it be to simply roll over and replicate the existing trade agreements that we have through the EU? In your view, does the Bill make provision for appropriate levels of consultation, parliamentary scrutiny and accountabilityQ ?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q Perhaps Nick Dearden could pick up the same topic and, in light of what Nick Ashton-Hart has said, comment on the use of Henry VIII powers within the Bill.
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Chair, I know that others on my side wish to come in, but those on the other side may wish to speak.
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Can I follow up? Can you at least suggest what sort of changes you think are necessary? How do you think Parliament can deliver what you have just indicated you wantQ ?
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Q What other countries do you think we should be looking to for the way they do these things?
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
Q Mr Dearden, you say that Parliament should approve Government entering into negotiations. Given that the Government are talking to at least 100 countries at all times about trade, how would that work in practice?
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
Q That sounds nice, but how does that work in practice? At what point are Ministers, or indeed our ambassadors, allowed to talk to another country?
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
Q How do you define that?
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
Q Would that apply to memorandums of understanding or bilateral agreements? You are talking in generalities, and I am trying to find out the facts.
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
Q What kind of trade agreement do you think is a good one? Some people think they are just a playground for the super-rich.
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
Q So free trade agreements are a good thing?
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
My concern is not with the follow-on scrutiny of events that happened, but more the idea that somehow Parliament should require our existing teams in negotiations to seek approval before they start those conversations. That is my concern, but I will not delay the Committee any longer.
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q You were talking about the way in which other countries do the preparation of mandate and scrutiny of the process of creating a trade agreement. I wonder whether perhaps Nick Ashton-Hart could talk about the system in Australia and how the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties does it—or perhaps the system in Germany. Could one of you talk about that?
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
I think we are familiar with that!
Tom Pursglove (Conservative, Corby)
AsQ Mr Dearden will know, this Bill is not concerned with the making of future trade deals. However, of the 40 trade deals that we are seeking to transition, could you set out for the Committee which you supported at the time and which you opposed?
Tom Pursglove (Conservative, Corby)
Q Did you support any of the deals at the time?
Tom Pursglove (Conservative, Corby)
Q Would you say that you are supportive of free trade?
Judith Cummins (Labour, Bradford South)
This question is for Nick Ashton-Hart. Given the sheer number and the complexity of the deals that you are describing, do you believe that it is possible to have all the agreements ready to go on day one after Brexit?Q
Martin Vickers (Conservative, Cleethorpes)
MrQ Dearden, you seemed to indicate that there are some countries with which you do not think we should do trade deals. Is that a fair comment?
Martin Vickers (Conservative, Cleethorpes)
Q Name some of them.
Martin Vickers (Conservative, Cleethorpes)
Q Going back to the issue of parliamentary scrutiny, under schedule 2, either House of Parliament can annul the regulations and prevent them from entering into law. Why do you regard that as inadequate?
Faisal Rashid (Labour, Warrington South)
What impact assessment should be conducted on the process, and why?Q
Faisal Rashid (Labour, Warrington South)
Q You mentioned things such as stakeholders and scrutiny a few times. Obviously the UK has not been directly responsible for trade deals for 40 years. Do you think this is the right opportunity to make a Bill that is more democratically, socially and economically transparent?
Kemi Badenoch (Conservative, Saffron Walden)
I would like to bring Mr Howarth into the conversation. Going back to the purpose of the Bill and the need for the continuity agreements with those countries that are covered by EU deals, how practical is it, in your opinion, to transfer those agreements into bilateral trade dealsQ ?
Kemi Badenoch (Conservative, Saffron Walden)
Q And the practicalities?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q You made an important point. Clearly we need to ensure that the trade we have with many of these existing partner countries continues. That is an essential focus, which I think is uncontroversial around this room, but when you are talking about the amendments that might be made—as these treaties cease to be simply EU treaties that we are part of and become bilateral relationships with these countries, new treaties and distinct legal entities, as the addendums to the Bill have made clear—do you agree that it would be a fine opportunity for many of these countries to say that they want greater access to our markets in return for having this new agreement with us, or that they might take the opportunity to protect their market a little bit more? Might one of the reasons why the Bill puts in place a Henry VIII power be precisely because it envisages a scenario where such amendments might be made and where we might have to accommodate them, and the Minister then adopts that power in order to do so?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q Sorry, I did not ask about the scrutiny. I asked about the Henry VIII power, because if, as you have just suggested, most of these things will simply be rolled over and there will not be changes, what is the point of the Henry VIII power? Why would the Government need that, unless they precisely envisaged that there would be changes that they required that power to accommodate?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q Why would a third-party country not take this opportunity? You took the issues of audio-visual in France, agriculture and so on. Why would a country not see this as an opportunity to get a better deal, as Nick Ashton-Hart has suggested they may well do?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q Indeed, but we have the need for speed. We do not want to gum things up. We want this to be done as quickly as possible, but that may not happen. Knowing that we are between a rock and a hard place in terms of time, other countries might see a negotiating advantage and an opportunity to press their case. Is that not the case?
Iain Stewart (Conservative, Milton Keynes South)
ToQ follow on from that question, the Bill contains a five-year sunset clause. How practical would it be to get substantial changes to existing arrangements in that timeframe?
Iain Stewart (Conservative, Milton Keynes South)
Q May I also ask about the cost of not having those continuity agreements? What would be the impact on British business if we were not able to replicate the current deals, or something very close to them, at the point of leaving?
Nick Smith (Labour, Blaenau Gwent)
IQ have a quick question for Mr Howarth and a longer question for Mr Ashton-Hart. Mr Howarth, you are a senior researcher at the House of Commons. Who exactly do you work for?
Nick Smith (Labour, Blaenau Gwent)
Q Mr Ashton-Hart, can you tell us more about the Australian Parliament and Government and how they do trade? In your view, how effective is that?
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Loudoun)
YouQ have mentioned that a lot of the existing deals are premised on the fact that you have got 28 EU countries and, therefore, are negotiating for a majority and compromise. Why would UK Ministers choose to just accept these deals and not be tempted to try and use Henry VIII powers to manipulate the deals or negotiate further? Why would they accept it is already a compromise?
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Loudoun)
Q You also mentioned quotas. How did quotas get allocated in the new deals? How does that come across without effectively leading to a renegotiation of a whole lot of deals, because so many countries have got vested interests in different quotas?
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Loudoun)
Q So it would still be a negotiation; there is no straight carry-over of quotas.
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Loudoun)
Q This is more for Nick Ashton-Hart. You outlined that you really think Government should be doing impact assessments—assessing risks and opportunities. In terms of risks and opportunities, am I correct in thinking that the Government also need to look at how they are shaping their future domestic policy? We have heard that part of Brexit is that it is supposed to give opportunities to replace the common agricultural policy, but surely if you are looking at existing trade deals—taking them over, risks and opportunities—you need to look at a whole raft of other policies that are going to replace current EU-agreed, Europe-wide policies and procedures.
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q Would we be negligent if we did not take this opportunity to try to improve the economic benefit that we get out of these deals?
Gillian Keegan (Conservative, Chichester)
Q You mentioned Australia and that example sounds truly horrendous, in terms of gumming up. By the way, I think that in Australia trade deals are signed and agreed by the Cabinet, not by Parliament. Bearing in mind that you are talking about whether we are really in a negotiation starting from scratch or a replication with minor changes, 18% of the world’s data is currently hosted in the UK. There are businesses right across Europe that are completely reliant on all of that trade working the day after. So do you not think that because there will be business pressure on things actually running practically, that will ensure that this negotiation does not go back to the beginning, because the business pressure is that it continues as efficiently as it runs today?
Gillian Keegan (Conservative, Chichester)
Q If that benefit has a cost of businesses not running, that will not be seen as a benefit in their own countries. That is what you are weighing up here, is it not? The status quo operating as efficiently as it does—
Gillian Keegan (Conservative, Chichester)
Q I do not think that we have seen anything quite like this, in terms of trade deals.
Anna McMorrin (Labour, Cardiff North)
May I ask Nick Ashton-Hart a question? In order to continue with the same access for our companies and the same conditions for supply chains, will not these deals need to be trilateral rather than bilateral, with an aspect of co-operating with the EUQ ?
Anna McMorrin (Labour, Cardiff North)
Q I was particularly thinking about rules of origin and diagonal cumulation.
Matt Western (Labour, Warwick and Leamington)
This is a question for Mr Southworth. Does the Bill as it currently stands have the support of businessesQ ?
Matt Western (Labour, Warwick and Leamington)
Q Mr Ashton-Bell?
Matt Western (Labour, Warwick and Leamington)
Q So you both agree that you would be looking for more consultation and more transparency. Is that fair?
Matt Western (Labour, Warwick and Leamington)
Q Mr McTague?
Matt Western (Labour, Warwick and Leamington)
Q May I link to that and ask about your experience with other countries, where you may have visibility? How do they do this better and what should we be considering to include in the Bill?
Matt Western (Labour, Warwick and Leamington)
Q Mr Ashton-Bell, would you like to comment?
Matt Western (Labour, Warwick and Leamington)
Q You see this as crucial to getting a good deal?
Matt Western (Labour, Warwick and Leamington)
Q Mr McTague, do you have a view?
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
Q Can I ask the witnesses about the Trade Remedies Authority? In your opinion, how effective do you think it could be, given that the Bill provides a framework? I appreciate there are lots of details to fill in later. How independent do you think that authority can be, given the way in which the Bill is currently drafted? I will start with FSB and work my way along.
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
Q Do you feel that there is sufficient distance between the Secretary of State and the TRA?
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
Q You are happy that the authority is sufficiently independent at this point?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q Mr Ashton-Bell, can I pick up on something you said because I noticed that you were nodding when Mr Burke was saying that. You said you struggled to understand how we could get the best deal without engaging every part of society in the debate. You also posed the question of who makes the fundamental decision. Do you therefore agree with Mr Burke that it would be helpful to have, in the nine places available on the TRA, statutory representatives perhaps of small business, the trade unions and producers? At the moment, the Bill has it as a blank sheet for those nine spaces, and nobody is really quite clear who might be appointed. Perhaps you could all comment on that, starting with Mr Ashton-Bell.
Kemi Badenoch (Conservative, Saffron Walden)
Q Speaking about the representation on the Trade Remedies Authority, there have been suggestions that Parliament should have a greater role on this board. What impact would that and other stakeholders have on the impartiality, accountability and timeliness of decisions? Could the panel tell us what they feel about having various nominations to non-executive membership? What impact would that also have on the independence and impartiality of the Trade Remedies Authority?
Kemi Badenoch (Conservative, Saffron Walden)
Q You don’t think that that would slow things down?
Kemi Badenoch (Conservative, Saffron Walden)
Q I am asking because I have had messages, particularly from farmers in my constituency, about remedies being very slow to be enacted. That is a real issue, so I would be looking for a very efficient remedies authority. I hear what you are saying, but I can also see a situation where the conversation goes on and on and no remedy comes forth. Justice delayed is justice denied.
Kemi Badenoch (Conservative, Saffron Walden)
Q Does anyone else want to come in on the make-up of the board, impartiality, timeliness, and so on?
Faisal Rashid (Labour, Warrington South)
Q I understand there were 60,000 responses to the consultation. The trade White Paper was published the day after the consultation closed. I apologise if I am wrong, but I think you said earlier that you were quite comfortable with the process. Do you think it is practical and do you think the consultation feedback from the stakeholders has been taken into account?
Faisal Rashid (Labour, Warrington South)
Q So what exactly has been taken into account?
Faisal Rashid (Labour, Warrington South)
Q I am trying to understand in real terms what in the Bill has been replicated from the consultation?
Faisal Rashid (Labour, Warrington South)
Q Do you think it is practical that the consultation finishes tonight and the Trade Bill is published tomorrow? Is that practical in terms of taking all views into account?
Faisal Rashid (Labour, Warrington South)
If there is no new Trade Bill, those Henry VIII powers stay.
Tom Pursglove (Conservative, Corby)
Q In my constituency—I represent the steel town of Corby—trade remedies are not theoretical, but reality. Mr Burke, what do you think the impact would be of not having a Trade Remedies Authority in place on day one when we leave the European Union?
Tom Pursglove (Conservative, Corby)
Q I am grateful for that answer. One of the reasons that we could get to a much better place on steel was because politicians from across the political divide worked together and industry came together with the unions and the Government. That led to quite a lot of success, so were you and your members surprised that not all Members of this House voted to give the Bill a Second Reading? I ask that because further down the line, hon. Members who had genuine concerns could have tabled amendments to the Bill that potentially would have addressed the concerns, and let the House decide whether they were appropriate. Do you see any alternative to establishing the Trade Remedies Authority?
Tom Pursglove (Conservative, Corby)
Q So they were pretty surprised that the Bill did not receive a unanimous Second Reading, with a view to amendments being tabled if hon. Members had individual concerns about things.
Judith Cummins (Labour, Bradford South)
Q We have heard a lot today about representation being vital to get the best deal and about gaining support from across society in terms of the Trade Bill and the trade deals. Tony Burke, in your view, is enough engagement in the formulation of trade policy with trade unions established by the Bill?
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Q I want to come back to what I think was a comment from James Ashton-Bell about what goes on elsewhere in the world, because actually a number of you have mentioned the United States and the way it handles both consultation on and scrutiny of trade agreements, but also the trade remedies approach. We will start with you, James, and perhaps others will chip in. Where, in addition to the United States, should we be looking for examples of good practice in setting up our Trade Remedies Authority?
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Q Before I move on to the others, what are the mistakes to avoid?
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Q Again, before I move on, is there an example of a mistake that you think we could learn from—something specific that you are prepared to be drawn on?
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Q Bearing in mind that the Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Bill deals with the powers, what do you see in this Bill as a way of addressing the concerns that you have just raised?
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Q Tony, I take it from what you have said before that you agree.
Gillian Keegan (Conservative, Chichester)
Q As I think you said, there is no perfect system today. You have acknowledged that there has been some attempt to go out and find out what best practice is, but what we should be doing is comparing with the system that we have got today. Today’s system probably has some challenges. It is EU commissioners and civil servants who decide. They send out questionnaires to get some of the interested parties’ involvement and input into their decision when we are faced with dumping or unfair trade practices. Surely the TRA represents an opportunity for us to do things better, and to design a system that will improve where we are today and, as you say, evolve over time. What we have today is not what you are describing as the minimum starting standard for our TRA as we move forward.
Gillian Keegan (Conservative, Chichester)
Q Is there any comment from you, James and Chris?
Gillian Keegan (Conservative, Chichester)
Q I accept that. You talked about the farmers in Wales and the industries in Yorkshire and all the different parts of our country, and that is why it is complex, but add another 27 countries to that and, by definition, it gets more complex.
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q I am heartened by what has been said about taking this as an opportunity to improve things. I think that that is absolutely right of both the TRA and the scrutiny. The EU is evolving its system to include social and environmental dumping in trade defence. Does the panel think that we should include those things in our TRA? If the EU is doing that and we are not, do we risk becoming the favoured dumping ground against Europe, which is adopting such measures?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q Specifically on the way in which the EU is introducing those environmental and social considerations into its assessment, I think the proposals elsewhere in the Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Bill are talking about the powers of the Bill and clearly that will be more closely defined there, but in principle, are those considerations ones that you would like to see in any impact assessment that the Government are conducting on their trade remedies?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Protect Mr Pursglove’s constituents.
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q Just to follow up, when the consultation period on the Bill ended and the MTRA had submitted its evidence to the Government, how long was it before the Government published the Bill, and do you consider that the Government took time to properly consider the representations to the consultation that they received? Did that maintain trust in the process from industry bodies?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Well—
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q Just for clarity, the consultation finished on 6 November and the Bill was published on the 7 November. Is that right?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q Mr Ashton-Bell, what are your comments on the way in which that would be perceived in terms of consultation being effective and the trust that Government were engendering?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
You should go into the diplomatic service.
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
But however quickly you take the process, you would want—
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Loudoun)
Q Chris, earlier on you made comments that said that if you were part of the devolved Governments, you would have concerns about their voices being heard and taken account of. Both the Scottish and Welsh Governments have expressed concerns that, at the moment, they are seeing the withholding of the legislative consent motion. When they are asked as to their representation on the Trade Remedies Authority, do you agree that would be a good starting point?
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Loudoun)
Q You then made recommendations of changes that could be made to the Bill as it stands, which would start to ease these concerns.
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Loudoun)
Q Does anyone want to add anything about devolved Administrations?
Faisal Rashid (Labour, Warrington South)
Q Obviously, we talked quite a lot about consultation and stakeholders, and I really appreciate that. Listening directly to you guys from very powerful organisations in our country is important for all of us parliamentarians. I need to understand exactly how important it is to consult with stakeholders in forming the Trade Bill or trade deals. What could be the impact for UK businesses in future if that is not done in the right way? I would like one quick line from each of you. Another quick question for Tony: does this Bill have the support of trade unions, yes or no?
Faisal Rashid (Labour, Warrington South)
Thank you.
Matt Western (Labour, Warwick and Leamington)
Q Thank you, Chair. I have a quick question to Mr Ashton-Bell. Yesterday, Carolyn Fairbairn made a very good speech, I believe. She was talking about the CBI quite rightly seeking a good Brexit. I hate to put you on the spot but I am sure you have had time to reflect on it. In your view, or the CBI’s view, does the Bill as it stands deliver a good Brexit? Or, what is it missing, other than what you have said so far this morning?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
I suppose what I would like to try to get out of this session is whether you feel that any lacunae have been created by Brexit in our system, whether there is appropriate scrutiny and transparency, and whether you feel that there are shortcomings in the Bill that need to be filled. May I start by asking the panel, perhaps beginning with Dr Hestermeyer, for examples of deals that will be the Q same, and of deals that may be different? Are they simply roll-over deals or are they substantively new, distinct legal entities?
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
May I ask DrQ Bartels about the remedies section, in part 2 of the Bill? In your view, how does the legal framework for remedies, particularly if a remedies authority is established, compare with others abroad? What are the strengths and weaknesses?
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
Does anyone want to add to that?
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
Q So you do not think that having Question Time and a Select Committee on trade is adequate.
Anna McMorrin (Labour, Cardiff North)
May I address this question to Dr Bartels? The Government suggest, to justify the absence of any process for parliamentary oversight, transparency and scrutiny, that trade negotiations need to be done confidentially and under some secrecy. What is your feeling about thatQ ?
Anna McMorrin (Labour, Cardiff North)
Q Some claim that non-tariff barriers to trade, such as regulations on standards, are protectionist. What is your opinion? Do you believe that is true?
Tom Pursglove (Conservative, Corby)
Quite a bit has been said, not just in this sitting but in the sitting earlier today, on the issue of checks and balances, and scrutiny. Would the witnesses accept that all of these agreements initially, when they were brought into being in the first place, went through an impact assessment process and that, on ratification, they were scrutinised thoroughly by the scrutiny Committees in both Houses? Also, the 2010 CRAG process—under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010—allows Parliament to pray against a treaty and indefinitely deny ratification, including bringing it to a debate. Do the witnesses recognise that and think it is sufficientQ ?
Faisal Rashid (Labour, Warrington South)
May I ask Dr Fowler toQ expand on a point raised in the Hansard Society paper, “Taking Back Control”, about the issues surrounding Government control of parliamentary time, and any implications this is likely to have for both the trade deals covered in this Bill—including the government procurement agreement membership—and the delegated powers that it grants, especially with regard to the negative procedure?
Faisal Rashid (Labour, Warrington South)
Q So is it fair to say that the Government have the ability to control debate and thus limit—or even totally deny—parliamentary scrutiny of the deals or the secondary legislation?
Judith Cummins (Labour, Bradford South)
We have heard a lot today about the importance of societal acceptance in the scrutiny process, andQ Jude Kirton-Darling certainly explained the scrutiny process for trade agreements currently in place in the EU and the European Parliament. Dr Fowler, could you explain the current parliamentary framework for the signature, ratification and implementation of trade agreements in the UK?
Martin Vickers (Conservative, Cleethorpes)
Ms Kirton-Darling, you referred to the scrutiny process in, say, Scandinavian Parliaments and the feedback to Brussels and so on. That may be very detailed but, of course, when it gets back to Brussels, Sweden or wherever is just one of 28. Their input in the great scheme of things, eventually, is rather watered down. Wouldn’t you accept the fact that, once Brexit is achieved, the UK, with the scrutiny via the Select Committee and the possible annulment through Parliament and so on, is more powerful than the voice we have at the momentQ ?
Martin Vickers (Conservative, Cleethorpes)
I thought you might say that.
Martin Vickers (Conservative, Cleethorpes)
Q That is a judgment in terms of the Brexit argument rather than the benefits of the Trade Bill.
Martin Vickers (Conservative, Cleethorpes)
Q Of a watered-down version.
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Loudoun)
Jude, earlier on, you mentioned tariff-rate quotas and the fact that the whole negotiating process is potentially back up for grabs between the UK, EU countries and the third countries. Going forward, as part of these negotiations, as a politician I would want to know which third parties are advising the Government and what the correct asks are. What impact assessment has been made of getting the desired result and any other trade-off that might be associated with that? How will we make sure that the correct people—the politicians, I would suggest—have approved or ratified the deal? What needs to be done or what amendments need to be made to the Bill to allow such a transparent process and that level of scrutinyQ ?
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Brigid Fowler, can you describe the procedure that you would recommendQ ?
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Q What alternative do you recommend?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q Perhaps I could start by asking Professor Winters about the economic partnership agreements that the EU has with developing countries. They are in the list of those that the Government are seeking to replicate. Do you believe that replicating those agreements and creating EU-UK equivalence is the best way forward in our engagement with the developing world? Are they models that the economic partnership agreements countries themselves would wish to see replicated?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Given that there is this renegotiation going on, do you feel that those countries might seek to use the occasion as a means of bettering the current agreement in some way? Or would they feel—if they are being told, “You will not get a trade agreement unless you do this quickly”—that they are being bullied into doing it against their will?Q
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
Q Professor Winters, we have before us in part 2 a broad legal framework for a future remedies authority. In your view, is it robust enough? If not, what should we be thinking about amending?
Anna McMorrin (Labour, Cardiff North)
Q The Government claim that the process of replicating the trade agreements to which we are currently party as EU member states would be a simple roll-over process. Do you foresee any complications?
Anna McMorrin (Labour, Cardiff North)
Q To follow up quickly, perhaps addressing Michael Clancy directly, what role do you believe the devolved Governments would have in trade negotiation prior to agreements being concluded? Do you think the Bill sets out suitable frameworks within which matters of devolved competence can be represented?
Iain Stewart (Conservative, Milton Keynes South)
I would like to ask Professor Winters a question about part 3 of the Bill, which concerns trade information. Would you agree that the information that this Bill enables will help the Government to shape their export support programme? Are there any additional powers that you would like to see this part of the Bill containQ ?
Iain Stewart (Conservative, Milton Keynes South)
Q Do you have any concerns about the practicalities of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs operating the system, as envisaged by the Bill?
Faisal Rashid (Labour, Warrington South)
Q Professor Winters, given what you discuss in the UKTPO paper with the example of South Korea, do you think it is fair to say that what the Government are presenting as bilateral discussions are actually trilateral discussions?
Faisal Rashid (Labour, Warrington South)
Q Thank you. According to the Queen’s Speech last June, the Bill is meant to set out the legislative framework for our independent trade policy. Do you believe that it establishes a proper framework to deliver what was promised?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q Picking up on both what Professor Winters said about not unpicking—Parliament should not be able to unpick a trade agreement—and what Mr Peretz said about Canada, Mr Clancy, once the UK Government, rather than the EU, set international trade agreements in place, what would be the implications if the devolved Administrations had a consent reserve and could implement some form of veto on internationally agreed obligations? How do you get that whole-of-governance approach where the consensus Mr Peretz was talking about is achieved so we know that what is agreed can ultimately be delivered without introducing an ex post facto power of veto that would stop it being implemented?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
You could write to the Committee.
Kemi Badenoch (Conservative, Saffron Walden)
I have a general question for the panel. Listening to what people have said about agreements and given the need that we have to maintain existing trade relationships with 70-plus partners and, I think, 40-plus agreements in general, do you think the Government need to change their approach fundamentally and, if so, howQ ?
Kemi Badenoch (Conservative, Saffron Walden)
Q Yes, unless anyone has anything further to add.
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Q George Peretz, you were talking before about the Trade Remedies Authority. Can I bring you back to that? I believe that the Government are conducting a review into which trade offensive measures can be rolled over or passed forward—having heard that last piece of evidence, I am not sure what description to use. Can you describe the challenges and the consequences if some of those are not used by us when we are outside the EU?
Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)
I want to go back to the scrutiny of the Bill. My understanding of what some people call the Henry VIII powers, for an SI or a DL, is that there is provision in both of those processes, whether they are negative or affirmative, to raise an objection for debate on the Floor of the House of Commons. My question is where is that process flawedQ ?
Craig Whittaker (Conservative, Calder Valley)
Q I want to come back on that. What you all say is that there are elements of truth in everything, but the reality is, yes, we have a huge amount to get through, and there is a place for the SI process to get some of these through quickly. My point to you is that, although there is a huge amount made of these so-called Henry VIII powers, this Parliament does actually have overall scrutiny control of these trade Bills if we choose to take it.
Matt Western (Labour, Warwick and Leamington)
Professor Winters, this Bill is supposed to be about the roll-over of pre-existing agreements. If that is the case, why is it necessary to include the Henry VIII powersQ ?
Matt Western (Labour, Warwick and Leamington)
Q Can you give an example of a substantive?
Matt Western (Labour, Warwick and Leamington)
Q Can I ask that of the others?
Alan Brown (Scottish National Party, Kilmarnock and Loudoun)
Q We have heard that Wallonia has got a veto. The devolved nations do not have a veto in this. Indeed the UK Government can make provision in devolved competencies. If you were a Scottish or Welsh Minister, would you recommend withholding a legislative consent motion unless this Bill was amended?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
rose—
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
rose—
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
Q Thank you, Mr Gray. I have asked other witnesses about the remedies regime, and I am interested in your views. In a way, you all represent industries that are familiar with this challenge. “Remedies” sounds arcane, but it is really about all the challenges a locality may face with dumping in particular business sectors. What would you want to see in an effective remedies authority, and what would need to change in the Bill to deliver that?
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
Q We know that there is not a lot of detail—it is a framework—but is there something specific, such as an appeals process, that you want to be teased out in our deliberations?
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
Q Is that specifically the national interest?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q Picking up on your last point, Mr Stevenson, in the EU, the Commission is obliged to report to the European Parliament on trade events, so there would be an annual production of just such statistics. There is a lacuna in the Bill in that there is no provision to make such a report to Parliament and to aid parliamentary scrutiny on trade remedies in that way. Is that something that you and the trade remedies alliance would seek to redress? Would you like to see introduced in this Bill some way in which a report ought to be made—an annual report perhaps—to Parliament?
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Q Can you describe what you think the authority should be comprised of? Who do you think should be on it?
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Yes.
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Q That neatly moves me on to another question. Can you describe what is at stake if we do not get this right after we come out of the EU? If you have specific examples, that would be helpful.
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Q Sure. Is anything different in ceramics?
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Q Do you think that needs to be appointed independently from the Secretary of State to achieve that?
Faisal Rashid (Labour, Warrington South)
Q The membership of the Trade Remedies Authority, which, according to the Trade Bill, is entirely at the discretion of the Secretary of State: do you think it is appropriate and effective? How does the proposed TRA compare to similar bodies in other countries?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q Picking up on something you said earlier about the importance of not having a weak trade remedies regime, in your view would it be a mistake to think that such a regime, which did not protect producers’ interests, might encourage other countries to do easier, quicker trade deals with us? Would it be a mistake to use that in some sense as a bargaining chip to get a trade deal?
Judith Cummins (Labour, Bradford South)
Q Unfortunately, my original question was to Mr Stace, but I will ask it to Mr Stevenson. Clause 6 of the Bill suggests that the TRA’s remit will extend to more than just trade remedies and to the analysis of trade disputes. Does that raise any concerns?
Matt Western (Labour, Warwick and Leamington)
We heard from Mr Stace a moment ago about an effective trade remedies system. In that one example, an effective system does not necessarily lead to higher consumer prices or significantly higher prices. Do you have other examples you can giveQ , Mr Reynolds?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Perhaps I can kick off with—sorry, is it Mr Jones who is from Standard Chartered?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Mr Bowles is from Standard Chartered and Mr Jones from UK Finance. Is that right?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q I will kick off, then, with the British Retail Consortium. [Laughter.] I am just keeping you on your toes!
The BRC has identified, among others, the agreements involving Norway and Turkey as the most significant of our EU FTAs. Of course, the Government have already indicated that there will be an end to free movement, which rules out simply replicating the Norway model, and that we will leave the customs union, which rules out simply rolling over the Turkish model, so what elements of the agreements—not just those two, but the others—do you consider it most important to replicate on substantially the same terms?
Iain Stewart (Conservative, Milton Keynes South)
Q I would like to put to the panel the same question I asked the previous panel about part 3 of the Bill, which relates to trade information and the collection of exporter information by HMRC in particular. Are you content with the content of the Bill in this part? Is there anything missing or do you foresee any practical difficulties in HMRC collating this information?
Faisal Rashid (Labour, Warrington South)
Q My question is to Mr Bowles: one of your chief economists for the African region noted that African countries such as Kenya were extremely concerned about having to renegotiate trade agreements with the EU and the UK. However, she concluded—her name is Razia Khan—that this process has taken many years already. Can you tell us what your views are on how long these deals will take and what difficulties will be encountered in the negotiations, from your point of view?
Faisal Rashid (Labour, Warrington South)
Mr Jones, would you like to add anything?
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Stephen Jones, you are the UK Finance representative. Sorry, it has been a long day. Can I ask about the written evidence you gave to the Procedure Committee, where you indicated the benefits of a triage or sifting process and stated how you might apply those when looking at new trade agreements? For the purposes of the phrase “new trade agreements”, given some of the evidence we have heard today, can we include anything that changes the agreements that are part of this Bill? Can you explain what you think the merit of such an approach would be, how you might apply it, and the importance of such a sifting process?
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Q Presumably you are talking about services with the EU during transition, given what you said previously about the short period of time between now and leave day.
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Q I do not know whether you heard the earlier evidence. Some witnesses have made points about the shortage of time, but they have also said there is a tension between time and getting it right. Given the short period of time, do you see a danger that agreement without a degree of scrutiny leaves problems that will be very hard to undo later?
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Q Just so I get this right and we do not misquote you, anything that carries on beyond 29 March 2019 must carry on with no changes to meet the requirements that you have just set out.
Bill Esterson (Labour, Sefton Central)
Q Do any other witnesses want to pick up any of those points?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q I want to pursue what Mr Jones said. We have got away from the initial question of the sift Committee. You stressed the urgency of this and the need to try to get things through as quickly as possible, and you adopted an approach to delegated powers and Henry VIII powers of, “Well, maybe they’re necessary in the circumstances”. However, it was your organisation that recommended that there should be a sift Committee in the EU (Withdrawal) Bill. Would that not be an appropriate way of trying to say, “What we’re talking about here is a minor change to an existing agreement, but this is actually a major change”?
We are talking about 100 separate agreements between the EU and Switzerland alone, some of which include free movement of people. There are going to be some major changes, such as those we talked about with Turkey and the customs union, and with Norway, free movement of people and the four freedoms. Do you not think, given that you have already recommended a sift Committee in one form, that a similar sort of mechanism for trying to distinguish between what is and what is not vital, and what should have parliamentary scrutiny, is a sensible way to proceed?
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
Q Mr Bain was very clear about the importance of continuity to business. Can I ask the chambers of commerce in particular, but also other witnesses, about that issue? Clearly, the Bill is about the continuity of existing arrangements. How important is that principle of continuity to your members?
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
Q Mr Jones, what about financial services?
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
Mr Bowles, is that your take as well?
Mark Prisk (Conservative, Hertford and Stortford)
Q On the financial services side, can we look at the issue of remedies? Clearly, in the current set of arrangements that is frankly irrelevant in a strict legal sense to you as a sector but, looking forward, the TRA is clearly not going to disappear in two years’ time or after however long the transition period lasts. Therefore, looking at the longer term, what is the relevance to financial services and what are the critical issues that you will be looking for in an effective remedies regime at that stage? Perhaps you can just give us one or two highlights to give us a sense. We have heard about goods so far, which is very important, but obviously services matter as well.
Nick Smith (Labour, Blaenau Gwent)
MrQ Bowles, I will ask just a bit more about Standard Chartered and the developing markets in the states and countries where you work. As previously mentioned, your Razia Khan predicts some difficulty in lining up quick deals in Kenya and other places in Africa. What is your view about other countries where your company has long-standing experience, like Vietnam and South Korea? How quickly can those countries respond to these sorts of deals?
Judith Cummins (Labour, Bradford South)
Q Mr Bain, to accompany the release of your report “The Bilateral Trade Deals that Matter to Consumers”, you note the importance of the Government replicating the trade agreements that the EU currently has with third countries to ensure that consumers do not see a rise in prices as a consequence of imposed tariffs and so on. Your report notes that 6% of retailer imports are covered by all EU bilateral agreements. Could you identify the particular countries that your members are concerned about?
Barry Gardiner (Labour, Brent North)
Q To follow up, I want to ask you all a question as business people. If someone introduced a break clause in a contract with you or one of your businesses, would you not take the opportunity to renegotiate the deal? Given all that you have said about the importance of clarity, stability, understanding and certainty about the future, which we entirely agree with you on—that is why we need a Bill to do this—do you not think that, if we were seeing changes introduced by these countries because of this opportunity, and some of the changes were substantial, and changed that clarity and certainty, then actually there should be a process of parliamentary scrutiny looking at them?
At the moment, we may not be in control of that process. We know that we would like it to be very simple, but it may not be. Given that, should the scrutiny not be in place for Parliament either to assist procedure or, using some other mechanism, to say, “Yes, this is important, and we need to make sure that we, as Parliament, deal with it in the appropriate democratic way”?
Faisal Rashid (Labour, Warrington South)
Q I will put Barry’s point in a different way. You mentioned continuity, which is absolutely fine—the industry needs continuity. You also mentioned that you do not want to see any change, but the Government have already noted that these agreements will be legally distinct and are likely to be different to the corresponding EU trade agreements. Do you believe that it is appropriate for any changes to be waved through using Henry VIII powers? That is one question. For British Chambers of Commerce members, how important is consultation on any elements that might change in these agreements?
Faisal Rashid (Labour, Warrington South)
Q A very short one, actually. You mention that obviously the European Union might not let us change anything—it will only roll over the existing deal—so why does this Bill need the Henry VIII powers?