Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill

My hon. Friend is slightly ahead of my argument. In the measure that I am discussing "opinion" is not used. It says that""the treaty has been published in a way that a Minister of the Crown thinks appropriate"." That is very weak and weasely language, and the hon. Member for Hendon is wise to say that it needs strengthening—supplanting, even—in order to be much clearer in respect of the Minister. My hon. Friend probably had in mind clause 26(1), where none of this need apply because, apparently,""if a Minister of the Crown is of the opinion that…the treaty should be ratified without the requirements of that section having been met"," the Minister can come to such an opinion, and then, as my hon. Friend says, the special language is a warning to the courts. We therefore have weakness upon weakness from Parliament's point of view. Ministers envisage that some treaties will not be subject to its approval at all, because they are of the opinion that such treaties are none of Parliament's business. They also hope that other treaties will be rushed through without Parliament expressing an opinion because the timetable is very tight for it to debate and be involved in the ratification process. Even for treaties that go the distance under the Minister's view—those that the hon. Member for Hendon seeks to influence—we have weasel words so that reporting to the House can be anything the Minister likes and may not be very much.