Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Mark Francois (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 20 February 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on European Union (Amendment) Bill.


European Union (Amendment) Bill

I should like to get on to amendment No. 264, but I will give way in a moment. Amendment No. 264 relates to the role and powers of the EU's high representative, which are identical to those of the Foreign Minister proposed in the original EU constitution—a point that the Foreign Secretary failed to address in his speech a few hours ago. I remind the House that the post was one of two crucial aspects of the treaty, along with the new EU president, that the former Foreign Secretary—the present Lord Chancellor—identified as essential to the last proposed treaty's constitutionality, thus providing the need for a referendum. I told my hon. Friend the Member for New Forest, West (Mr. Swayne) that he had anticipated my making this point; it is definitely a point that is worth reiterating. A senior member of this Government's Cabinet has said that if this provision was in the treaty, we deserved a referendum. Well, it most certainly is, so what has happened to the referendum that we were promised? On that point, I shall gladly give way to the Liberal Democrats, who, as of today, have not got a clue whether they want a referendum or not.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
472 c436-7 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
EU enlargement European Union European communities EU common foreign and security policy EU institutions Treaties United Nations Treaty on European Union Russia EU defence policy Treaty of Lisbon EU presidency
Legislation
European Union (Amendment) Bill 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk