I am sorry, but that piece of casuistry takes some beating—[Interruption.] It was casuistry! First, I remember the Government telling us, when those utterances were made, that the constitutional treaty was no more than another Maastricht. In fact, as the Secretary of State well knows, the Lisbon treaty is, in almost all its particulars, identical to the constitutional treaty abandoned after the French referendum. For those reasons, the public know very well that they were given a promise and that it was reneged upon. That highlights the difficulty with such legislation. How can people have any confidence that procedures of any sort will not be abused by Ministers who break fundamental pledges that appear to be made in manifestos?
Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Dominic Grieve
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 20 October 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
497 c818 Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:29:12 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_586167
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_586167
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_586167