Hilary Benn MP: speeches

Speeches

• 4 Mar 2025 · Trade Diversion and Windsor Framework · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. and learned Gentleman may disagree. I am expressing the Government’s view, which is that it is not a credible basis. One thing is absolutely clear: the answer was never to try to wish the dilemma away and pretend that it did not exist. I am afraid that, at times, it has appeared as though that argument has been advanced. The first go at trying to find an answer was the Chequers plan, which did not get support. The Northern Ireland protocol was the second go, but that was never going to work—I made that argument as an Opposition Back Bencher—so the Windsor framework was negotiated. There is no denying that the Windsor framework represents a huge improvement on the prospect created by the Northern Ireland protocol.

• 4 Mar 2025 · Trade Diversion and Windsor Framework · Hansard source

  More

  Kind though it is of the hon. Member to encourage me to come to Northern Ireland, as she knows I am in Northern Ireland on a very regular basis and a little while ago I had a meeting with her and two organisations, at her request. I meet businesses on a very regular basis. I met the Northern Ireland Chamber of Commerce and Industry Brexit working group and I always do my level best to respond to requests for visits from colleagues in the House of Commons, including the hon. Lady, but there are only so many hours in the day. I wanted to point out that the independent monitoring panel, which I met for the first time yesterday, has started its work. Establishing the panel was a commitment made in the safeguarding the Union Command Paper. Its job will be on the basis of the evidence and it will be provided with data on the flow of goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland to say whether the UK internal market guarantee is being met. The first six-month reporting period commenced on 1 January and will conclude on 30 June 2025, following which the IMP will publish its assessment and any recommendations. I commit to the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim, and all those who contributed to the debate, that I shall consider the report with the same attention to detail that he has shown in forwarding his argument today. To conclude, this Government are committed to Northern Ireland. They are committed to the United Kingdom and to implementing the Windsor framework in a manner that is consistent with protecting Northern Ireland’s place within our internal market. Question put and agreed to.

• 4 Mar 2025 · Trade Diversion and Windsor Framework · Hansard source

  More

  It depends on the hon. Gentleman’s definition of “freely.” There are requirements that certain goods must meet. There is the retail movement scheme and the horticultural scheme, and certain paperwork and documents are required, looking forward to the customs requirements being reduced later this year—hopefully when the new arrangements come in—but the goods move, and I do not think that anyone in the debate can stand up and say that the goods are not moving in those circumstances. As I have indicated, the Windsor framework represents a step forward. Although I respect the sincerity with which the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim makes his argument, I do not believe that current circumstances meet the article 16 test. Pulling that lever in the current circumstances would actually throw away the progress secured by the framework and damage the good faith that has been built up in taking the framework forward. We all need to remember that, not long ago, we had a Government who signed an international agreement and then set about showing that they had no intention of honouring it. That did extraordinary damage to the United Kingdom’s international reputation.

• 4 Mar 2025 · Trade Diversion and Windsor Framework · Hansard source

  More

  I can only apologise to the hon. Gentleman. I try hard to be punctilious about responding to correspondence. Those watching will have noted what he said, and he can, I hope, anticipate receiving a reply from me very soon. For the Government’s part, I want to be equally clear. We needed to have a system in place for managing a unique set of circumstances. The system we have is the inevitable result of leaving the European Union. That is where this all began; if that had not happened, we would not be having this discussion. What did that result in? Two trading entities—the United Kingdom and the European Union—with different rules, but an open border between them. That is to be found nowhere else in the world. In other words, all of us together—everyone has to take responsibility for what they argued for, and for the consequence of that—faced the question: how do we deal with the unique situation of two trading entities with different rules having an open border between them?

• 4 Mar 2025 · Trade Diversion and Windsor Framework · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim (Jim Allister) on securing the debate. The House, once again, has been left in no doubt but that he speaks about Northern Ireland’s trading arrangements with fervour and sincerity, as he did in the Westminster Hall debate in November, to which I responded, and in the debate on his private Member’s Bill in December, to which the Under-Secretary of State for Northern Ireland replied on the Government’s behalf. On the Windsor framework, his position is quite clear: he is opposed to it.

• 4 Mar 2025 · Trade Diversion and Windsor Framework · Hansard source

  More

  I have only just begun my remarks, but if the hon. Gentleman will bear with me, I shall shortly come to the point that he raises. The Windsor framework protects the UK internal market, while, as I argued a moment ago, enabling the EU to be confident that its rules will be respected. The Government’s view and my view is that that was the responsible thing to do in the circumstances, because this Government support sustainable arrangements for Northern Ireland that respect its particular circumstances —indeed, they are unique—and its place in the Union, and that uphold the Good Friday agreement. The hon. and learned Member for North Antrim’s central argument this evening is that we should trigger article 16, the unilateral safeguard in the Windsor framework. To do that would be contrary to Northern Ireland having stable arrangements for trade, now and in future. It would disregard the benefits that the Windsor framework offers for businesses—indeed, the benefits that are actively relied upon by businesses, including those that are taking advantage of Northern Ireland’s unique access to the UK and EU markets— [ Interruption. ] The hon. and learned Member for North Antrim shakes his head, but I have met businesses that have told me how they are taking advantage of that dual market access. I meet businesses in my constituency that can see what Northern Ireland has got out of these unique arrangements. Those benefits will be enhanced by the UK internal market “facilitations”—that is the phrase—that will come into force in the near future, and that will, on a durable and legally binding basis, support the smooth flow of goods across the whole of the UK when the next phase of the UK internal market system is implemented this year, without, for example, unnecessary international customs paperwork. We have seen the benefits of negotiating a way forward. There is unilateralism, as the hon. and learned Gentleman argues, and there are the benefits of negotiation. In respect of agrifood and sanitary and phytosanitary measures, we have been able to lift the old ban on the movement of seed potatoes. Not all those problems have been solved—I am the first to acknowledge that—but it is an improvement compared with the situation before. We are now able to apply UK public health and safety standards to agrifoods on the basis of primacy for goods staying in the United Kingdom moving under the Windsor framework schemes. We have reached agreements with the EU on tariff rate quotas, enabling businesses from Northern Ireland to import steel and agrifood products under UK tariff rates. We also have an active Assembly that is scrutinising the regulations and raising its views— [ Laughter. ] Well, I will come back to that point later on. Medicines for the whole of the UK are now authorised by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, and we have ensured that Northern Ireland benefits from the same VAT, alcohol duty and other taxes as the rest of the UK. All of those are undoubted benefits for Northern Ireland. They are benefits of the framework that supports Northern Ireland’s access to the two markets, and from which this integral part of the United Kingdom, which Northern Ireland is, uniquely benefits. This is possible because we have a lawful and sustainable agreement, in stark contrast to what the hon. and learned Gentleman has proposed as a way forward. I would be the first to acknowledge from this Dispatch Box that the Windsor framework is not perfect. We all know that. Where problems arise with the practical operation of the framework, this Government and the EU have tried to show that we can work through them in a constructive and pragmatic way, because that is what we have to do. For example, having listened to businesses, we took a pragmatic decision to extend on the timetable for implementing the new arrangements on parcels. One of the consequences of doing that was that the introduction of the new, less onerous customs arrangement was put off, because the EU’s view was that we needed to do the parcels at the same time in order for the new customs arrangements to come in. Another example is the horticultural sector, where, in the last month the restrictions on the movement of two species of plant were removed. If we are talking about trees, I think that takes it up to 23, including our beloved silver birch and, I am advised, a number of varieties of cherry tree that were sorted out at the end of last year. On the question of the Stormont brake, we acted on the concerns that the Northern Ireland Assembly raised about the potential implications of the new rules on chemical labels, font sizes and so on by committing to consult on taking forward measures across the UK that will protect the UK internal market. I would just point out—because the hon. Gentleman looks slightly sceptical —that there is a high bar to be met for the Stormont brake. When I received the application as Secretary of State, I was under a legal obligation to consider the application under the rules of the Stormont brake, and I made the decision that I did. In the end, what the Government announced was moving towards the same outcome that those who had raised the concerns in the first place wanted, just by different means than they had sought. In the end, the Stormont brake process actually worked to achieve the outcome that the Assembly wanted.

• 4 Mar 2025 · Trade Diversion and Windsor Framework · Hansard source

  More

  If the hon. Gentleman wishes to provide me with further information about the particular example he has raised, I will of course look at it. On trade, I have a slightly different set of figures from those that the hon. and learned Gentleman used. From 2020 to 2023, purchases in Northern Ireland from GB went from £13.4 billion to £16.2 billion—an increase of 20.7%. Sales to the year ending December 2023 from Northern Ireland to GB rose by 12.4%, to £17.1 billion. He used a phrase at the beginning of his speech—I hope I wrote it down correctly—the “natural inclination of trade”. I would simply observe that the inclination of trade is a consequence of decisions that individuals and firms make, and those patterns change over time depending on what they want to buy or sell and what the market itself looks like. The point I was making, without seeking gratitude, is that in every one of the examples I have just given, the Government worked to resolve the challenges we faced, working with stakeholders in Northern Ireland and with the EU, in what I think is a constructive and mutually beneficial way. That is what a responsible Government do, including abiding by commitments in international law on the world stage. The hon. and learned Gentleman advocates triggering article 16. That measure refers both to trade and to instances where serious economic, societal or environmental difficulties are liable to persist. Given that most goods are flowing relatively smoothly between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, how can it be argued that we are facing those difficulties? I would just make the point that if one goes to the port, the lorries come off and most of them go on their way—the goods are moving. That is in contrast to the argument that the hon. and learned Gentleman put towards the end of his speech, when he used the phrase “cripple” in relation to the Northern Ireland economy. I have seen no evidence that the Northern Ireland economy, which, by the way, has the lowest unemployment in the whole of the United Kingdom, is being crippled by the matters that we are discussing.

• 4 Mar 2025 · Trade Diversion and Windsor Framework · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. and learned Gentleman has had quite a lot to say and I have given way to him three times, so I hope he will bear with me while I continue my remarks. In the past, the idea that the UK would be a country that signed an international agreement and then reneged upon it would have been extraordinary to us all in this House, but that is what happened in very recent living memory, and it is why I put this point to the hon. and learned Gentleman. The last Government negotiated the Windsor framework. I stood up in the House and supported it. The Opposition supported it at that time, and I voted for it because I genuinely believed that it represented a significant step forward. But if we do not honour the most recent agreement that we have signed with the European Union, why would it wish to reach agreement on what this Government are currently seeking, in particular on an SPS veterinary and agrifood agreement? This Government have come in saying that we want to do that, while the last Government appeared to say, “Well, the trade and co-operation agreement is all we want—we don’t want anything else.” This Government have a very different view: we want to negotiate an SPS veterinary and agrifood agreement, and that would help considerably with some of the issues that have been raised during the debate. The Government will continue to listen to the concerns of businesses and respond pragmatically.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 · Hansard source

  More

  I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer that I gave a moment ago.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 · Hansard source

  More

  As I said during the last Northern Ireland questions, no one wants to see that happen. We are currently working to find a lawful way of dealing with the problems that were created by the way in which the original interim custody orders were signed in 1972 and, I think, 1973. In 2020, the Supreme Court found that orders that had not been signed and considered by the then Secretary of State were not lawful.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 · Hansard source

  More

  The approach to legacy taken by the last Government was wrong. It caused immense pain to victims and survivors, and in many respects has been found to be unlawful. In December I laid a proposal for a draft remedial order to address the human rights deficiencies in the Act that had been identified by the courts, and when parliamentary time allows, I will introduce primary legislation to reinstate legacy inquests halted by the Act and to reform and strengthen the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 · Hansard source

  More

  Because sections 46 and 47 of the Act were found to be unlawful, and, as the right hon. Gentleman will be aware, the case that gave rise to the attempt to deal with the problem through those sections that have now been found to be unlawful arose from a Supreme Court judgment in 2020. For two and a bit years, the last Government were unable to find a solution.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 · Hansard source

  More

  The whole House will have profound sympathy for all the victims of Gaddafi-sponsored IRA terrorism, and all the victims of the troubles. The Shawcross report was commissioned by the last Government as an internal report, and decisions on the report and its future are currently under review by the FCDO.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Independent Reporting Commission: Seventh Annual Report · Hansard source

  More

  I do indeed agree with my hon. Friend. That programme is doing very good work, and of course the UK Government are funding it together with the Executive. I also agree that a wide range of approaches needs to be taken, including continuing to use the full force of the law to deal with paramilitary criminality.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Independent Reporting Commission: Seventh Annual Report · Hansard source

  More

  The IRC’s report highlights progress, but reminds us that there is still much to do to tackle paramilitarism and the harm it causes. Following discussion with the Irish Government, it has been agreed to support a short, independent scoping exercise to assess whether there is merit in a formal process to bring about paramilitary group disbandment, as the IRC has suggested, and whether there would be public support for such a process.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Independent Reporting Commission: Seventh Annual Report · Hansard source

  More

  I am very happy to join in what appears to be the general consensus of welcome for the IFA’s announcement, a proposal that I discussed when I met the IFA during my time as shadow Secretary of State. On the substantive issue that the hon. and learned Gentleman has raised, the fact is that 26 years later, people say that the paramilitary organisations should have left the stage. They are still here, despite the progress that has been made, and are still causing harm to communities. The IRC’s proposal—which I recognise is not supported by everybody—is to inquire whether there are some paramilitary organisations that do actually want to leave the stage, and whether there is merit in having a process that ensures that. However, what I announced yesterday is not a process; it is a scoping study to find out whether it is worth having one or not, which I think is the right thing to do.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Independent Reporting Commission: Seventh Annual Report · Hansard source

  More

  I recognise, not least because of the commemorative hearings that have been taking place in the inquiry, that all the pain, suffering, horror and tragedy of that day have been brought to life again for the families who live with that every single day of the week. I welcome the fact that the Irish Government are committed to co-operating with the Omagh inquiry. I look forward to the signing of the memorandum of understanding. It is for the Irish Government to decide what inquiries they wish to establish in relation to events in the Republic.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Independent Reporting Commission: Seventh Annual Report · Hansard source

  More

  For the avoidance of doubt, there is no question of paying anybody any money to disband. There is no question of doing that at all. As I indicated a moment ago, for all the efforts that have been made—there is much to learn from what has worked—the fact remains, as the Independent Reporting Commission report makes clear, that many communities in Northern Ireland continue to suffer real harm because of paramilitary activities. What is the proof that those who say they are prepared to disband are doing so? The proof will be: do they end recruitment, paramilitary-style assaults, intimidation, child criminal and sexual exploitation and violence against women and girls? That is what people are experiencing today in Northern Ireland.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Public Services · Hansard source

  More

  I have not looked specifically at the social partnership model in Wales to which he refers, but I look forward to learning more about it; it sounds very interesting. As I have indicated, we have a lot to learn from each other.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Public Services · Hansard source

  More

  As I indicated a moment ago, I look forward to the Executive adopting a programme for Government. I am aware of what happened earlier today; I am confident that another meeting will be arranged, and I look forward to seeing the programme adopted.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Public Services · Hansard source

  More

  I hope very much that the programme for Government will be agreed as soon as possible; it is the responsibility of the Northern Ireland Executive, and I look forward to reading it. A number of bids were submitted for transformation funding. They have been carefully looked at by the interim board and, as I indicated a moment ago, I look forward, together with the Finance Minister, to announcing the results of that work soon.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Public Services · Hansard source

  More

  I share the concern that my hon. Friend expresses about the number of vacancies. The single most important thing that the Government have done is allocate for next year a record sum to the Northern Ireland Executive of £18.2 billion, which is an increase of £1.5 billion. The resources are there, and it is for the Northern Ireland Executive to decide how they will use them.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Public Services · Hansard source

  More

  I do not accept that, because getting to a net zero world is really important for the future of humankind, and the Government have commitments that it is very important to fulfil. As for delays in the planning system and the way in which the courts operate in Northern Ireland, once again, those are matters for the Executive.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Public Services · Hansard source

  More

  I regularly meet Northern Ireland Ministers to discuss the shared challenges we face in improving public services, and the Government will do everything we can to help. Last week, I met the new Finance Minister, and we both expect to be in a position soon to announce progress on funding to help with the transformation of public services.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Public Services · Hansard source

  More

  I do agree. He has great expertise and knowledge, and I am sure that it will be used for the benefit of people in Northern Ireland, particularly patients waiting for appointments.