Proceeding contribution from Baroness Stuart of Edgbaston (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 26 February 2008. It occurred during Debate on treaty on Treaty of Lisbon (No. 7).
Treaty of Lisbon (No. 7)
That is a genuine problem for me. As a Bavarian brewer's granddaughter, I would be happy to drink only German beer. However, that is not the point. I was making a wider point, as hon. Members know. With some matters, such as the single market, we have different rules, but as we expand we should change the presumption, whether we are dealing with health or shared competences and so on. If the single market is so important, why have not we fully implemented it? However, I am digressing. I want to consider the role of national Parliaments. I do not want them to be completely separate institutions, but proper guardians of subsidiarity. The current system does not work. I know that through chairing meetings of 27 countries, which sent representatives of their national Parliaments to Brussels. The only thing about which we could agree was that, if it was Tuesday, we were in Brussels. We could sometimes agree about whether it was raining. However, trying to get two thirds of representatives to agree on a matter in eight weeks is impossible. Everything is out of synchronisation. If we are serious about the role of national Parliaments, the House must change the way in which it operates. It is not a matter of strengthening the European Scrutiny Committee or providing more information, which would simply cause even more confusion. The role of the Minister for Europe needs to be changed. We need a Minister for Europe who is not based in the Foreign Office and who comes to the Dispatch Box regularly to answer questions about negotiations in Brussels and the deals we have made—whether on health, trade and so on. That person needs to fulfil the political function that UKRep currently performs. It is incredibly powerful and not accountable at the Dispatch Box. If that were changed, hon. Members would routinely come here and ask questions. I object to the provision in the treaty on the people's petition. It was included deliberately to keep the Germans happy. They felt that, without that provision, the Green party, which was a coalition partner at that point, would demand a referendum. The provision was included because their constitution allows for a referendum. I object to it because national Parliaments do not have the power to petition the Commission. Everybody furiously protects the Commission's right to be the only initiator of legislation. Yet we say that a significant number of people should have the right of initiation. That is wrong and undermines this place even more. When the Minister talks about more power for national Parliaments, will he please not only focus on more information but take note—that also applies to the Deputy Leader of the House, who is sitting next to him—that the House is currently failing in its duty to make European decisions accountable? Even outside the treaty, we can make significant changes that give genuine power to national Parliaments. So far, we have not done that.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 472 c962-3
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Accountability EU law European Union EU action EU institutions EU reform EU internal relations Treaties Treaty of Lisbon
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 00:57:07 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_448954
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_448954
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_448954