I agree entirely, and my next point is linked to that. The nature of the parliamentary approval cannot just be a motion; it must have statutory basis, which is the route that the Prime Minister has followed. There are various reasons for that, but the obvious one is the extremely uncertain status of resolutions of this House under current parliamentary practice. The Brexit Secretary is only the latest example of someone saying that anything that is not statutory is not legally enforceable, but just a “statement of intent”. The House of Commons keeps passing all kinds of motions with which I ferociously disagree, but they get carried by this House and make all kinds of criticisms of what the Government are doing. We have moved into a new era in which the Government are allowed to keep saying, “Parliament may pass motions, but they are worthless expressions of opinion. They are not part of our being accountable to the elected body of the House.”
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Clarke of Nottingham
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 13 December 2017.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on European Union (Withdrawal) Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
633 c429 Session
2017-19Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2018-09-20 12:51:57 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-12-13/17121332000194
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-12-13/17121332000194
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-12-13/17121332000194