The noble Lord, Lord Kerr, applied the test of common sense to the relationship between Clauses 2 and 3. Sometimes I wonder about the common sense on the other side of the House as I do not hear much of it in this debate. He concluded his remarks with a devastating argument against the inclusion of Clause 3 on the grounds that it is simply not necessary, and that with the amendments to Clause 2 it really should not be there. The great French writer Antoine de Saint-Exupéry said that perfection is reached not when everything that could be written has been written but when everything that need not be written no longer remains. I have that pinned on my computer at home when I write. If he had been listening to this debate he might well have come to the conclusion that Clause 3 fell under that rule and that it is not necessary. I shall certainly support those who claim that it should not stand part of the Bill.
European Union Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Grenfell
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 26 April 2011.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on European Union Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
727 c42 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 15:53:03 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_735549
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_735549
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_735549