The hon. Gentleman is right, but of course one problem with statutory instruments is that they operate until they are negatived, whereas the difficulty with a treaty is that once it is ratified, it exists as an international obligation. As we know from our discussions on the Lisbon treaty, Parliament cannot do much about it afterwards. That is why the key response that the Government have to provide in this debate—I am sure that he is right about this—is on how there can be a guarantee that the House will be in a position to bring forward a negative resolution and debate it within the 21-day period, and that the Government will not use a sleight of hand to wriggle out of their obligation in that respect. If they cannot provide that response, my sympathies will switch entirely to the hon. Gentleman and I will say that the clause is not worth the paper it is written on. At the moment, I take it at face value that the Government are well intentioned.
Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Dominic Grieve
(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 c203 Session
2009-10Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-11 09:56:39 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_617419
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_617419
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_617419