My Lords, my perspective is that of a former negotiator. I do not think that a serious parliamentary procedure of the kind set out in the amendment for the approval of a mandate and the approval of the outcome of a negotiation damages one’s negotiating stance or limits one’s flexibility. I do not believe that at all. Having negotiated against Americans, I know that it greatly strengthens their hand to be able to say, “Here is the proof that I cannot give you what you want, because Congress would turn it down”. At the end of the day, when Congress turns one down—and it does—that is a very serious and effective deterrent to those disagreeing with the Americans in a negotiation. Speaking against unilateral disarmament in 1957, Aneurin Bevan talked of the dangers of sending the Foreign Secretary naked into the conference room. If we do not accept the amendment in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Stevenson of Balmacara, we will weaken the hand of British negotiators in the future.
Trade Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Kerr of Kinlochard
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 6 March 2019.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Trade Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
796 c671 Session
2017-19Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2019-03-13 11:40:23 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2019-03-06/19030677000053
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2019-03-06/19030677000053
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2019-03-06/19030677000053