I simply want to come back to the question of signing, as compared to ratifying, the treaty. All our discussions have revolved around assumptions to do with the word "ratification" in the clause. However much progress is being made towards a general objective, we have not yet dealt with the question of whether, in light of the Government's apparent intentions, it would be preferable—I would be interested to hear what the Minister has to say about this—to relate the entire process to signature rather than ratification. Article 11 of the Vienna convention lists various ways in which a state can express its consent to be bound. These include signature, exchange of instruments constituting a treaty and, among others, ratification, acceptance or approval. I do not want to turn this intervention into a speech, but I must point out that it is terribly important, if we are to get this right, to link consent to signature rather than to ratification in this context.
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 c215 Session
2009-10Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-11 09:56:34 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_617467
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_617467
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_617467