My Lords, I have often been in agreement with the noble Lord, Lord Wigley, in the course of these debates but I hope that he will forgive me on this occasion if I do not go with him. I wholly agree with the underlying sentiments that he has expressed; my concern is with the word “objective” because it is very difficult to define at any one time what an objective truly is. Some are stated and some are unstated—and even if stated, they may not represent the true state of mind of the person making the statement. The problem with an amendment of this kind is that it is capable of giving rise to litigation. I just do not see how a court could ever seriously determine whether the objective of a Government at any one time was sufficiently truly stated to give rise to the remedy which I know will be sought by the litigants. With the greatest respect to the noble Lord, although I agree strongly with his underlying sentiments, I do not think this is the way to achieve that objective.
European Union (Withdrawal) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Viscount Hailsham
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 8 May 2018.
It occurred during Debate on bills on European Union (Withdrawal) Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
791 c51 Session
2017-19Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberLibrarians' tools
Timestamp
2018-05-09 18:41:47 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2018-05-08/18050822000013
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2018-05-08/18050822000013
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2018-05-08/18050822000013