My Lords, in respect of the amendment that the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, successfully passed in this House, I agree with him that the clause now before your Lordships is entirely satisfactory. I just want to say a few of things about it. First, I do not think that Clause 18 was ever necessary, except in a political sense. Secondly, I do not think that the law was ever unclear. Thirdly, it is one of the comical aspects of our unwritten constitution that if you ask a group of lawyers or law students the origin of the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty, they never know the answer. The answer of course is that it comes from the common law. That answer is most unwelcome to a certain kind of thinker, who thinks, ““Oh dear, if it comes from the common law, the courts might take it away again””. We do not have to go into that today.
This amendment states the position as has always been made clear in the case law and therefore does no harm. I only wish that it had not been necessary in the first place. I also wish that the original Explanatory Notes that the Government introduced had not been maintained instead of being withdrawn for political reasons for another set of Explanatory Notes, all of which shows the unfortunate aspects of a Bill which is a politically cosmetic exercise in this respect.
European Union Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Lester of Herne Hill
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 13 July 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills on European Union Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
729 c774 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 17:55:27 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_760711
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_760711
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_760711