UK Parliament / Open data

Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill

Yes, I wholeheartedly deny that the European Court of Justice has the power to determine every one of our laws. That is simply not true. Sovereignty remains with Parliament because we have the right, if we want to, to leave the European Union. What is more, although there is a clear definition of "treaty" in the Bill, the definition of what constitutes competences that the hon. Member for Rayleigh provides in his proposed new clause 68, is incompetent. It confuses the concept of competence with jurisdiction and invents three wholly new legal concepts—supplementary jurisdiction, shared jurisdiction and exclusive jurisdiction, none of which exists in UK or European Community law. Moreover, the word "jurisdiction" is understandable in the context of the European Court of Justice, but not in the context of the objectives and powers of the EU. His proposal therefore falls at the first hurdle. Nor is there a definition in any of the amendments of the "transference of competences". As a result, as several hon. Members have made clear today, the law would be wholly uncertain about when a referendum would be triggered. Indeed, as a parenthesis, I would add that the new clause refers to the transfer of "competences", in the plural, so would there not have to be a referendum if a single competence was being transferred? What counts as a singular competence, and when would there have to be a referendum? Let us not look at hypothetical examples; instead, let us examine real treaties that have already been through the system. Would there have to have been a referendum for the instrument amending the convention for the establishment of the European Radiocommunications Office, which was laid before Parliament under the Ponsonby rule in December 2002? The hon. Member for Rayleigh is looking remarkably empty- headed. The instrument limited the UK's power to act and it created a new European body. Would it require a referendum? The hon. Gentleman does not know. Would there have to have been a referendum on the protocol established in accordance with article 34 of the treaty on European Union, amending, as regards the creation of a customs files identification database, the convention on the use of information technology for customs purposes? That created new powers elsewhere and took them away from this country but, again, we get an empty face from the hon. Member for Rayleigh. What about the several stabilisation and association agreements between EU member states? What about the accession treaties? The right hon. and learned Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Mr. Hogg) said he believed that every European treaty that he had been involved with, presumably including all the accession treaties, should have been subject to a referendum.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

504 c255 

Session

2009-10

Chamber / Committee

House of Commons chamber
Back to top