---

Business of the House (Lisbon Treaty) (No. 8)

My right hon. Friend has made a pertinent point, which I wish to reinforce. It is even worse when the Government constrain debate on a treaty to which this country would theoretically be committed for a very long time. I doubt whether the Government's motion today will cut much ice with Michael White of The Guardian. On 22 February, he wrote in that newspaper, in an article entitled, ““Lisbon debate rings hollow””:"““Labour's chief whip has persuaded MP's to vote to overrule their own standing orders. Instead of line-by-line debate which explores changes to foreign policy procedures, EU co-operation on crime or energy, at least half of each day is devoted to a 'themed' discussion, with debate on specific amendments tacked on later. Does procedure matter? No one would be allowed to change the rules before a football match or criminal trial.””" I also doubt that today's motion will impress Philip Johnston of The Daily Telegraph, who, in a piece on 11 February entitled, ““The debate on the Treaty of Lisbon is a scandal””, argued about the procedure for debating treaties as follows:"““Conventionally, this is done by tabling amendments to specific clauses and debating them in fine detail. But this is not happening and it is a scandal.””" He then went on to note:"““When Mr. Brown was challenged about this in the Commons last week, he said 'We are considering the European Union (Amendment) Bill day by day in the House of Commons in great detail.' Day by day, but not line by line. The cynicism is breathtaking."