9th January 2019
The Meaningful Vote on the Agreement for the Withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union and the Political Declaration on the Future Relationship between the UK and the EU 
1. Introduction 
On 23 June 2016, the United Kingdom agreed to leave the European Union and in March 2017 the Government served notice under Article 50 of the Treaty on the European Union to leave on 29 March 2019.  
Subsequently the UK Government have been negotiating the terms of our withdrawal from the EU. These negotiations have not been straightforward, though a Withdrawal Agreement and a Political Declaration which sets out a framework for the UK’s future relationship with the EU, have now been published.  
These terms for leaving the EU will be debated further in the next few days and they will be put to a meaningful vote in the House of Commons on 15 January.  
I am now setting out my views on the proposals and how I intend to vote. 
Whilst I voted for the UK to remain in the EU in 2016, I am mindful of the fact that 63% of those who voted in Waveney voted to leave the EU. I respect this decision and I have subsequently made it clear that I will not thwart Brexit. My decision on whether to support the current deal is based on what I believe is in the best interest of the Waveney area and the whole of the UK. I have considered the terms of the Agreement carefully and have also taken into account the feedback I have received from constituents, local businesses and those working in the NHS.  
From the outset of the negotiations I have held the view that they were always going to be difficult; that the EU negotiators would be obstinate and awkward and that disentangling 40 years of ever closer integration would be complex and would not be achieved in “one fell swoop”. 
2. The Withdrawal Agreement 
The Withdrawal Agreement extends to 585 pages and most of its provisions are straightforward, acceptable and what one would expect to find in an agreement of this nature, where two parties are parting and going their own separate ways.  
One of its provisions is for there to be an Implementation Period which runs until 31 December 2020, which allows businesses to continue trading as they do now without any disruption, whilst the arrangements for a new trading arrangement with the EU are put in place. From the feedback which I have received from business I understand why there is a need for such a transition period, so as not to unnecessarily disrupt business and place jobs at risk. 
The issue that has been scrutinised most closely are the provisions that relate to Northern Ireland. It has been very difficult to reach an agreement that protects the integrity of the UK, retains an open border with the Irish Republic and does not undermine the Good Friday Peace Agreement.  
The Withdrawal Agreement sets down the mechanism for addressing this issue. Both ourselves and the EU are required to use our respective “best endeavours” to reach an agreement on the Northern Ireland issue by the end of December 2020. If this does not prove possible then we shall enter a “backstop” during which further negotiations will take place.  
The Agreement contains legal provisions designed to ensure that an understanding is reached on this issue as soon as possible and it is expressly stated that the “backstop” is not a permanent solution and is only a bridge to a future relationship.  
As an alternative to entering the “backstop” the UK can request a single extension to the Implementation Period beyond 31 December 2020.  
There is understandable concern that despite the various legal duties imposed on ourselves and the EU we could find ourselves in the Implementation Period indefinitely. That said, the EU’s negotiators have stated that they do not want the UK to stay in a “backstop” longer than necessary as they believe that would give our businesses an unfair competitive advantage. 
It is clear that there is widespread worry that the Backstop could go on indefinitely and thus the Prime Minister is seeking further political and legal assurances from the EU that if it is to be used it will only be a temporary arrangement. 
3. The Political Declaration 
The Political Declaration extends to 27 pages. It sets out heads of terms for the UK’s future relationship with the EU, which it is intended should be finalised and agreed by 31 December 2020. 
It contains specific details for our future economic relationship with the EU, including a new Free Trade Area with no tariffs, new arrangements for financial services and with regard to fishing, on which I comment further below, for the UK to be an Independent Coastal State with control over our own waters, deciding who can access them and on what terms.  
The Declaration also sets out the terms for a future security partnership and how we will cooperate with the EU on such matters as the exchange of sensitive data and information relating to defence and security and extradition arrangements that will enable the efficient and swift surrender of suspected and wanted criminals.  
In summary the Agreement secures the following political objectives:- 
a) Control of UK Borders and the end of Free Movement 
b) We shall no longer be making significant annual contributions to the EU and we shall be able to spend more on our own priorities such as the NHS, transport and infrastructure. 
c) We shall be able to agree our own free trade deals around the world.  
d) We shall have control over all our own laws, ending the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in the UK. 
4. The Fishing Industry 
Brexit provides a unique opportunity to revitalise the Lowestoft and East Anglian fishing industry. 
The foundation stone upon which this will be achieved is taking back control of our waters out to 200 miles or the median line with other coastal states. In doing so we would resume the position that we held prior to joining the Common Market of being an Independent Coastal State.  
This means that we shall control access to our waters, deciding who can access them and on what terms. This is something that the EU, in particular the French and the Dutch, do not like in that they wish to retain access to our waters on the same terms as in the Common Fisheries Policy. In negotiations to date the Prime Minister has steadfastly refused to agree to this and it is important that this position is retained.  
A specific drawback of the Withdrawal Agreement as it relates to fishing is that during the Implementation Period up to 31 December 2020, the UK will not be directly involved in the annual negotiations relating to fishing opportunities, though we shall be observers, can be consulted and the EU have to abide by various undertakings not to undermine the interests of the UK fishing industry. There is a risk as stated above that if the Implementation Period is extended as an alternative to the Northern Ireland “backstop” then this “limbo” period will be extended.  
The Fisheries Bill which will provide the basis of the future UK Fisheries Policy that will replace the Common Fisheries Policy is currently going through Parliament and ended its Committee Stage in the House of Commons on 17 December.   
I was on the Committee which went through the Bill “line by line” and I obtained some amendments and clarification from the Government on issues of concern, which I shall pursue further when the Bill reaches its Report Stage in the next few weeks.   
Generally the Bill does provide the framework within which the Lowestoft industry can be revitalised and the Minister has agreed to bring forward regulations early in the New Year which will ban electro-pulse fishing by Dutch vessels in UK Waters.  
So as to make the most of this opportunity the local fishing industry, in collaboration with Waveney District Council, have secured a grant from Government 
to fund a study of the East Anglian industry. This work, which will take place over the next few months, will establish the current state of the industry from the Wash to Southend, will seek to quantify the extent of the “Brexit Dividend” and will reach conclusions in terms of what investment in infrastructure, skills and training is needed in order to bring the maximum benefit to our area.  
In conclusion the current position is not as I would ideally have liked it to be; in that I would have preferred the UK to be resuming its role as an Independent Coastal State, negotiating directly with the EU, Iceland, Norway and the Faroe Islands as from December 2019. However as part of the overall negotiations to allow UK business to leave the EU with minimal disruption we have had to compromise and will not be able to take on this role until December 2020 at the earliest. There is a risk that this period could extend still further. 
I have considered whether the terms that have been negotiated so far do provide the basis upon which we can revitalise the East Anglian fishing industry. On balance, I believe that they do, though risks and tough negotiations lie ahead. These include the need to retain the right to control who fishes in our waters. The Prime Minister has steadfastly refused to compromise on this and has reiterated that she will continue to resist pressures to do so, particularly from the French and the Dutch.   
5. Alternatives 
It is important to consider the alternatives to the deal that the Prime Minister has negotiated.  
As to matters currently stand if the deal is rejected we would be leaving the EU on 29 March with no agreement in place. From the feedback which I have received from local business including manufacturers, food processors, hauliers and the energy industry this would be an extremely risky course to pursue which could disrupt business and place jobs and livelihoods at risk. The Suffolk Chamber of Commerce have also raised their concerns.  
Today the operation of food stores, factories and the supply of medicines takes place on a “just in time” basis with limited amounts of products and raw materials being held in storage. Many of these materials are imported and if there is any disruption or delay in their delivery then there could be an adverse knock-on effect to the local community and economy. 
A local GP has highlighted to me that 80% of medical radioisotopes, which are used to treat a broad range of conditions including cancers, neurological diseases and palliative treatments, are imported primarily from Belgium, France and the Netherlands. The nature of radioisotopes is that they cannot be stockpiled and they begin to decay as soon as they are produced. Thus any delay in their delivery could have very serious implications. 
Another alternative which has been suggested is that there should be a second referendum. I do not agree with this as it would significantly undermine the very 
ethos of democracy and the very many people who voted for Brexit would lose all confidence in the democratic process.
6. Conclusion
The deal is not perfect, it is a compromise, but that is so often the case in such complex negotiations. There are aspects of it which I do not like and it is important that the Prime Minister obtains further political and legal assurances from the EU that show that if at all possible the Backstop is never used and if it is, it will only be a temporary arrangement.  
As matters currently stand I believe that the Prime Minister’s deal is the best of the options currently on offer and thus I will be voting for it. 
Peter Aldous Member of Parliament for Waveney 
December 2018 

The Renaissance of East Anglian Fisheries

Construction (Retention Deposit Schemes) Bill

Construction (Retention Deposit Schemes) Bill


Peter holds regular surgeries at various locations in the constituency. Please call 01502 586568 to make an appointment.

Next Surgery: 

Lowestoft, Saturday 23rd February


A47 Alliance

Suppor the A47 Alliance

Download the report...

A47 Gateway to Growth


Search form

Your Local Councillors

Enter your Postcode below for details of all your elected representatives:


Constituency Map

View Waveney in a larger map