Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Kerr of Kinlochard (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Monday, 13 June 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on European Union Bill.


European Union Bill

I was using the language of our Act, the Act in force in this country now. I am talking the 1993 Act language, which is replicated precisely in my amendment. I am very glad to hear the Minister agree that we must avoid a second referendum and that we must avoid the crisis weekend drama, but in a plain reading the Bill says that what should be put to Parliament and the people is the draft of the decision under Article 140(3), which sets out the rate. That is the decision that we are going to take over a weekend, and it is going to be a busy weekend if ECOFIN starts on Friday, Parliament sits on Saturday and the referendum is on Sunday. It is not going to be fun. I agree that under my language the Government could do exactly as they want. Under their language, I believe that the country would think it very odd if they did not see the draft decision including the rate, because that is what Article 140(3) of the consolidated treaty says. It uses the rate; the rate is there in the treaty. So although I regret that I have taxed your Lordships’ patience long enough, I think that I really have to test the views of the House. Division on Amendment 22 Contents 187; Not-Contents 188. Amendment 22 disagreed.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
728 c609 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Administration of justice Armed forces Defence equipment EU law European communities Euro Powers Prosecutions Referendums Sovereignty Treaties Treaty on European Union UK membership of EU Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union EU defence policy Treaty of Lisbon
Legislation
European Union Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk