Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from David Lidington (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

The points are not vague. I invite the hon. Gentleman to have another look at clause 4 and schedule 1, both of which define in clear terms the various ways in which competences could, within the terms set out in the treaties, be enlarged, transferred or expanded, while schedule 1 sets out in detail a list of national vetoes, the removal of which would automatically trigger a referendum. I gently suggest that the hon. Gentleman studies the Bill a little bit harder. The second condition is that Parliament's approval has to be gained for the treaty change in all cases, no matter how minor or uncontroversial, by Act of Parliament. That legislation would provide for the approval of the treaty change and, where a referendum is required, provide the necessary enabling measures to allow it to be held. The need for an Act of Parliament is central to our role in holding Ministers to account for the decisions they take on behalf of the UK in the EU. If Parliament were of the view that a referendum should be required for a future treaty change, despite that proposal coming in one of the exempt categories, it could amend the approval legislation to provide for a referendum if it so wished.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
522 c119 
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