Ladislaus backs motion after ‘agonising process’ over multiple concerns 

GSD MP Joelle Ladislaus told Parliament she had gone through an “agonising process” in deciding whether to support ratification of the UK/EU treaty for Gibraltar. 

Ms Ladislaus said the treaty would have a “seismic impact” on Gibraltar’s social and political landscape and, potentially, on identity.  

She argued the Opposition had a duty to scrutinise, not only the text, but also whether the Government had kept to the red lines it promised would not be crossed, and she criticised what she described as a late release of information on a complex agreement.  

She said the Government’s message was that there was “no other choice” because the alternative was too damaging, but argued that the public had not been able to assess those alternatives because risk assessments referenced by ministers had not been published.  

She said the treaty, as presented, offered “certainty of uncertainty” because key elements would be shaped later through committees and bodies that were yet to be established.  

Ms Ladislaus also highlighted the agreement’s termination mechanisms, noting provisions that allow for termination without giving a reason within the space of 12 months, and warned that Gibraltar could be exposed if there were a change of government in Spain to one more hostile towards Gibraltar.  

On sovereignty, she acknowledged legal opinions obtained by the Government but said legal protections could differ from “operational realities”, arguing that symbolism and the lived experience of Gibraltar’s relationship with Spain mattered.  

A central concern was the issue of “boots on the ground”, focusing on policing cooperation provisions including continued surveillance and hot pursuit.  

She questioned how such measures would operate in a small, densely populated community, and asked whether Spanish officers would be armed.  

She argued the Government had fuelled mistrust by assuring the public there would be no Spanish presence, while the treaty framework appeared to legitimise Spanish law enforcement roles.  

Ms Ladislaus also raised health-related issues, including the absence of clear provisions for Gibraltar residents needing healthcare when travelling in the EU, and questions about restrictions linked to medical devices, frontier worker access to GHA services and limits on where Gibraltar ambulances could transport patients under the treaty annexes.  

She said her initial reaction was to vote against the motion, describing that as an emotional response to provisions she believed affected self-determination.  

But after reflecting with colleagues, she said she would support the motion because the alternative was likely a hard border and the disruption that would bring.  

She said the amended motion, including safeguards tied to the concordat and a referendum mechanism on termination, provided additional protections, even if they could not remove all the unknowns.