---

European Union (Amendment) Bill

My Lords, the amendment seems extremely injudicious and to cut absolutely across almost the sole point on which everyone agreed in our long debate earlier—that the Irish were not to be bullied, subjected to fait accompli, pushed into a minority of one and subjected to pressure. Yet, if it were accepted, the amendment would do all those things. It would mean that before a British Minister could go to the Council and agree with his Irish colleague and his 25 other colleagues on some, "““non-Treaty proposal, undertaking or document designed to secure ratification of the Treaty by any EU member state””," he would have had to have votes in both Houses of Parliament. If anybody with any knowledge of Anglo-Irish history believes that the Irish would be more likely to vote ““yes”” in a referendum if the text that they were being offered had first to be approved by the British Parliament and had then been presented to them as a fait accompli in Brussels, they have not been reading the same history books as me. I am sure that the intention behind the amendment is entirely benign and helpful. The introduction of the noble Lord, Lord Hunt of Wirral, was full of good will but the consequences would be absolutely disastrous. If we passed the amendment, we would not have to wait 24 hours before the sound of keening from somewhere west of here—around Dublin—would be clearly audible.