Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Liddle (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 17 May 2011. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on European Union Bill.


European Union Bill

The Minister mentioned the coalition agreement, which is obviously a compromise between parties that have different views on Europe, but did not the Liberal Democrat party conceive of what it was signing up for in the coalition agreement in the following way? The Lisbon treaty had gone through and been ratified; the Liberal Democrats had supported that in Parliament. That is why the coalition agreement clearly states that the passerelles should be subject to proper parliamentary approval but not to referenda. The Liberal Democrat view was that the flexibilities contained within the Lisbon treaty should be subject to proper parliamentary scrutiny but not to referenda. New treaties of the conventional type were a different matter where the Liberal Democrats were prepared to accept a case for referenda. I am not speaking for the Liberal Democrats, but it seems to me on any objective reading of the coalition agreement that that is what was intended. However, that is not what this Bill says; this Bill is not what was agreed.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
727 c1357 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Administration of justice Contributions European Union Discrimination Electoral systems EU budget Economic and monetary union EU justice and home affairs Referendums Treaties Treaty on European Union UK membership of EU Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Legislation
European Union Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk