European Union (Withdrawal) Bill — Customs duties — 20 Dec 2017 at 21:00
Kelvin Hopkins MP, Luton North voted with the majority (No).
“not less than two years”.
“As I said in my speech at Lancaster house a period of implementation would be in our mutual interest. That is why I am proposing that there should be such a period after the UK leaves the EU…So during the implementation period access to one another’s markets should continue on current terms”.
“six months of the passing of this Act”
“No Minister of the Crown shall appoint exit day if the implementation and transition period set out in subsection (1) does not feature in the withdrawal arrangements between the UK and the European Union.”
“So during the implementation period access to one another’s markets should continue on current terms and Britain also should continue to take part in existing security measures. And I know businesses, in particular, would welcome the certainty this would provide.
The framework for this strictly time-limited period, which can be agreed under Article 50, would be the existing structure of EU rules and regulations.”
“from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification…unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.”
“to do all it can to remain within or as close as possible”
“would seriously bring into question 10 years of investment, as registrations and authorisations that permit access to the EU single market would suddenly become non-existent on exit day”.
“Compliance with chemicals regulation represents the key to market access…Compliance is non-negotiable. Failure to comply is a barrier to market access. Without market access there is no trade.”
“looking at how we can use the European Chemicals Agency and the REACH Directive in order to ensure we can trade freely”.
“British business will have to learn to get by in a different world.”
“so far as operative immediately before exit day”,
“Right across the country, the chemical industry has made a huge investment into REACH compliance. It is not perfect – far from it. It is however becoming an international standard, and our compliance with – and involvement in – such a regulation is essential in enabling us to continue trading effectively across border, both from an import point of view but much more significantly from an export perspective.”
“BASF does not take a rigid view on whether REACH is the best possible regulation for current and new chemicals, but it is established, tested and most importantly, a requirement for selling chemicals within the EU. Regardless of what model of Brexit any of us prefer, that isn’t going to change…Our supply chains, operating between ten UK manufacturing plants, and many more across Europe, require clarity that materials can be legally processed and sold, in transition, and after the UK has left the EU.”
“We have many concerns about the implications of Brexit on our ability to trade effectively and competitively within the EU, where we export 60-70% of our products.”
“The UK Government’s decision to leave the single market will have significant implications.”
“When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?”
The House divided:
Ayes 114, Noes 320.
Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.
What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.
What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.
What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.
|Party||Majority (No)||Minority (Aye)||Both||Turnout|
|Con||306 (+2 tell)||2||0||97.8%|
|Lab||4||62 (+2 tell)||0||26.0%|
|Kenneth Clarke||Rushcliffe||Con (front bench)||aye|
|Frank Field||Birkenhead||Lab (minister)||no|
|Kate Hoey||Vauxhall||Lab (minister)||no|
|Kelvin Hopkins||Luton North||Lab (minister)||no|