Proceeding contribution from Baroness Nicholson of Winterbourne (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Monday, 13 June 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on European Union Bill.
European Union Bill
In moving his amendment, the noble Lord has not explained to my satisfaction, or perhaps to the satisfaction of others, why the removal of these two lines from the text of the Bill, which would result in QMV rather than a veto on the protectionism of military products, would assist the development of the free market, as he and I wish to see. From my experience in Brussels, sometimes sitting in the chair on common security and defence policy debates, it was very clear that some member states—particularly some of the smaller and newer ones—wished to pursue protectionism to an extent that would have been extraordinarily unhelpful both to the defence of the European Union and to the wider defence policies of countries such as the United Kingdom. In other words, we need the veto and I cannot understand why the noble Lord wishes to remove it.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 728 c623
- 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 16:38:18 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_748451
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_748451
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_748451