I completely agree with my hon.—and learned—Friend, who makes the central point. He will correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that until recently the courts shied away from reviewing the exercise of prerogative powers. These days, they are far more gung-ho in acting as a check on the decisions of the Executive. We should be under no doubt that the significance condition set out in the Bill is the decision of a Minister, meaning a decision of the Executive. As such, it is amenable to judicial review. In that way, we have the check and balance, which gets us out of the problem that concerns me: the issue of whipped votes being used to ram legislation through Parliament under some future Government. That does not apply to the current Minister, because he is a fine Minister who will use the powers correctly, but what if a future Minister has a more Euro-enthusiastic approach?
European Union Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Charlie Elphicke
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 24 January 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on European Union Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
522 c78 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 14:26:11 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_704586
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_704586
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_704586