Proceeding contribution from Charlie Elphicke (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 24 January 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on European Union Bill.
European Union Bill
I believe that they would refer the decision back to the Minister to take into account relevant considerations, which would prevent a perversity. For example, if a Minister were to say that joining the euro was not significant, and if there were no other checks and balances in the Bill, an individual might decide that the matter was very significant and seek a judicial review. The courts would then tell the Minister that that was a perverse and an unreasonable decision.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 522 c77-8
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Committees EU law EU accession European Parliament members Legislation European communities Powers Referendums Parliamentary scrutiny Sovereignty Treaties Reform UK membership of EU Turkey Treaty of Lisbon
- Legislation
- European Union Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 14:26:10 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_704581
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_704581
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_704581