Proceeding contribution from Lord Clinton-Davis (Labour) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 19 November 2009. It occurred during Queen's speech debate on Queen’s Speech.
Queen’s Speech
I am delighted that the noble Lord, Lord Williamson, is present, for several reasons: first, I have always had a high regard for him; and, secondly, he served the EC with great distinction for 10 years. I was very impressed with the thoroughness of the European Union Committee’s work, which reflected extraordinary expertise. Few parliaments in the EU could have carried out this vital task in such a way. As a former European Commissioner, I am an unashamed supporter of the concept of the EU. Of course, like all political institutions, it has made mistakes, but its overall accomplishments have been impressive. France and Germany, once at each other’s throats, now work in harmony. Smaller states enhance their status and preserve their interests by co-operating purposefully in the enterprise. The EU is a major player on the world stage. I only wish that the UK had been rather more engaged. While we are an important member, we could have done much more to advance the EU’s salient work. The Opposition—not all of them, of course—are prepared to put all this at risk. Frustrated by the EU’s unanimity over the Lisbon treaty, they ally themselves with some highly dubious political groups and engage in imprecise and dangerous policies vis-à-vis the EU. At least we know where we are with UKIP, and that is too dire to contemplate. In the new Parliament, the Conservatives—I hope still in opposition—could be even more undermining. If elected, where would they stand in respect of initiatives proposed by the Commission and endorsed by the European Parliament? Save for those few issues which they have exempted, the Conservatives seem to relish the idea of Britain being sidelined and regarded as irrelevant. Nothing said by the noble Lord, Lord Howell, today weakens that point. His honeyed words cannot hide the bankruptcy of the Conservative Party’s ideas about Europe. The Conservative Opposition charge that the Commission is undemocratic. That hardly chimes with reality. Every proposal and amendment is closely examined by civil servants within the Commission and by Commissioners, most of whom have been politicians in their own countries. Some have served with enormous distinction. Moreover, a Commissioner will invariably be accessible to those with wide experience of the subject being considered—including Ministers and those accountable to them. Even then, a proposal as amended will again be scrutinised by the Commission, interested parties and the European Parliament. Few legislatures undertake that degree of oversight, and nothing has been said about that important point by the Conservative Opposition today or at any time. Is all this, therefore, to be lost sight of? How practicable is the approach of the Conservative Opposition? To believe that Britain can stand alone or select whatever it pleases is simply fanciful. As my noble friend Lady Kinnock put it in this debate: ""There is no future in diplomacy by tantrum"." That is highly amusing, but also deadly serious. An enforceable agreement on climate change is possible at Copenhagen, but is regrettably unlikely. However, we should heed the advice of the vast majority of eminent scientists who advise us. If agreement at Copenhagen is elusive, we shall have to reach an accord at another venue in the very near future. There is no escape from that situation. If, by chance, the sceptics are right—which is improbable—what will have been lost? Lots of time and money. However, if they are wrong, which is more than a possibility, we risk much more—the future of our earth. Other issues of magnitude were mentioned by my noble friend at the beginning of this debate: world poverty and disease, nuclear dangers and many others. She is right; we cannot tackle these alone. We need allies, particularly in the EU, but beyond. Our opinion within the EU can help add weight to a successful outcome on many significant issues. But if we stand outside and simply complain or behave as a disgruntled observer, we will forfeit the influential situation that we should occupy—and which we are attempting to do today.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 715 c80-1
- Session
- 2009-10
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Defence Armed conflict Commonwealth Climate change Development aid Defence equipment Cluster munitions Human rights European Union Foreign policy Nuclear weapons Peacekeeping operations Politics and government Pakistan Terrorism United Nations Myanmar Afghanistan Sudan Sri Lanka Zimbabwe Middle East Peace negotiations Democratic Republic of the Congo Rwanda Somalia al Qaeda Taliban Treaty of Lisbon
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-11 17:36:55 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_595675
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_595675
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_595675