Does the hon. Gentleman agree that as we feel our way towards some kind of understanding and solution on this matter, part of the problem is categorisation? It is well established that the Government normally give time for debate and sometimes a vote on what are described as "important treaties". The problem is what is described as important. Perhaps an answer to the question whether there should be a negative or affirmative procedure is that there should be criteria to determine what is important and what is not so important. Those criteria could determine which categories of treaties should be regarded as essential for debate and a vote. That could include memorandums of understanding and other matters that fall into the category of being of incredible importance for discussion. That raises the question of signature, about which I shall speak later.
Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill
Proceeding contribution from
William Cash
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 19 January 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
504 c202 Session
2009-10Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-11 09:56:38 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_617415
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_617415
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_617415