I will not make any comments on the amendment of my noble friend Lord Lea, which the Minister dealt with very clearly. We on this side of the House greatly appreciate the courtesy with which the Minister has dealt with the many points that we raised in the long debate on the Bill—as has the noble Lord, Lord Wallace of Saltaire. However, what I failed to hear in the Minister's summing-up was an acknowledgement that the Bill that leaves this House is very different from the Bill that arrived, and that on fundamental points the House has amended it in a way that we hope the other place will take due notice of. We have reduced the compulsory requirement for referenda on 56 issues—I know that this figure is disputed by the Government—to three; we have clarified the sovereignty clause in a way that satisfies former Lord Chancellors; we have introduced a 40 per cent turnout threshold for a referendum to be binding; and we have passed a sunset clause that will require a future Parliament by positive resolution to revive the Bill. These are very significant changes and I hope that on the Government’s side there is an acknowledgement that they must think seriously about the views that were expressed on all sides of the House in a very broad consensus that the Bill is badly flawed.
European Union Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Liddle
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 23 June 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills on European Union Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
728 c1398-9 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 16:32:26 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_752349
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_752349
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_752349