If we are talking about a specific enhanced co-operation, and the Minister accepts that we are, we have something going on out in the field—this is Article 333 on common foreign security policy. A particular kind of external activity is taking place and we do not know what it is. Those who are taking part in it have to make rapid decisions. They have to decide what we do tomorrow about situation x. The treaty says that if they unanimously so decide, they may take implementing decisions by qualified majority in relation to that specific deployment, or whatever it is. They are not changing the treaty or the general rules but are dealing with the problem that has arisen now. I do not understand the different scenario that is being presented when the Minister says that this will be prepared over time and that there will be a lot of consideration. This is about implementation. It is about people in the field. That is why I think it is rather inappropriate. Is the Minister quite sure that it is appropriate to make this a matter on which the UK would need to pass primary legislation?
European Union Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Kerr of Kinlochard
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 23 May 2011.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on European Union Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
727 c1605 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 16:10:32 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_745299
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_745299
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_745299