My Lords, I thank the Minister warmly for responding with his customary courtesy and patrician patience to our obtuseness. I thank all those who have taken part in this little debate. Sometimes it seemed like Second Reading again but it was good to see some new faces not seen in the seven or eight days of Committee. I am always glad to see new people join the debate.
I was particularly grateful for the contribution from the noble Lord, Lord Jopling, who speaks with great authority and who gave the answer to the noble Baroness, Lady Falkner, on how the procedure set out in the amendment could be made to work. I believe that it could be made to work here in this Parliament and I know that it would work perfectly well in Brussels. I have been there during a general election. I recognise that the night, though it could be very short, will not be short enough for the noble Baroness. I accept that.
I agreed very much with what the noble Lord, Lord Waddington, said. There is no doubt that, at least in the first general election, the two parties would make pledges. That is not a bad idea. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Triesman, and the noble Baroness, Lady Williams, that bringing EU issues into general elections is exactly what we want to happen to deal with the disconnect. It is a far better way of dealing with it than the obscure provisions in this extraordinary Bill.
It makes sense to have a minimum reappraisal of at least once every five years, if we are having fixed-term Parliaments. At the start of each Parliament, it would make sense to ask Parliament whether it agreed that in relation to EU business—though not in relation to any other business—its rights and sovereignty should be subscribed to this extent. It would also make sense to consider who is right about the effects in the outside world, on the developments in Brussels and the British standing there, as well as on the British ability to support and advance the national interest in Brussels. I may be completely wrong, and I accept that, but I think that it makes sense to have a look every now and again and see who is right. Therefore, I would like to test the opinion of the House on this amendment.
Division on Amendment 35.
Contents 209; Not-Contents 203.
Amendment 35 agreed.
Amendment 36 not moved.
European Union Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Kerr of Kinlochard
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 15 June 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills on European Union Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
728 c844-5 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 16:40:24 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_749493
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_749493
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_749493