Featured Video Play Icon

During one of the days debating the Government’s Withdrawal Agreement from the EU I was able to raise my concern that the Government have erected the barrier of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) when it wasn’t needed.

For us to have access to the European Arrest Warrant we need to be a member of the ECJ. As my colleague, the Shadow Home Secretary, stated this will prove to be a risky endeavour by the Government.

Featured Video Play Icon

Five days of debate has now started over the Government’s Brexit Withdrawal Agreement. This is the nearly 600 page document agreed between the UK Government and the EU nations. It is the legal basis for us leaving the EU.

Accompanying the document is a shorter ‘political declaration’. It is not legally binding and includes a wish-list of what the UK Government wants to secure in a future relationship with the EU. Neither of these documents detail how the UK will retain access to key security tools used by our police and security services.

The Home Secretary stumbled over his answer. Obviously knowing that the Government was not seeking to retain these vital tools. Let us be clear, the Government is undermining our security with their agreement and I cannot support it.

Featured Video Play Icon

The Prime Minister has made it no clearer whether we will remain a member of EUROPOL following Brexit and now the Home Secretary has muddied the waters further.

Each time I ask if our police and security services will have continued access to EUROPOL, which enables them to share information on criminals with our European allies, I get no concrete response.

We must remember that there are two parts of the Brexit process before us: the Withdrawal Agreement and the political declaration. The two are inextricably linked, but only one is legally binding. The Withdrawal Agreement contains no international law agreement which will give the UK access to EUROPOL. The political declaration, which can be ignored, talks of ‘wishes’ ‘hopes’ and ‘aspirations’ of continued partnership.

This is not good enough. When pressed again the Home Secretary couldn’t give me any assurances. This is playing with fire when it comes to our national security.

Featured Video Play Icon

The Prime Minister returned to the House of Commons today in a hope of selling her Brexit Withdrawal Agreement.

From the very beginning of this Brexit process I have said that leaving the EU without access to EUROPOL, EUROJUST and the European Arrest Warrant will put our safety and security at risk. Indeed, the Prime Minister noted in her reply that I have often pressed her on this issue.

The Withdrawal Agreement is so thin on the ground when it comes to security arrangements that I wanted assurances that we would continue sharing security systems after we leave the EU and not merely shadow them. Without access to these databases our police and security services will be greatly undermined.

The Prime Minister pointed to the political declaration saying that we will work together to “identify the terms”. This means that there is no agreement but merely the hope of achieving something. Also, unlike the Withdrawal Agreement the political declaration is not legally binding so all words contained within it are meaningless.

The first role of government is to ensure the safety and security of its citizens. This Withdrawal Agreement fails this test.

There are many reasons for voting against the Government’s Brexit strategy but this for me is one of the biggest. That is why I will vote against the Withdrawal Agreement when it comes to Parliament in December.