1-11 of 11 results for subject:Netherlands
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.318 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.003 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Netherlands
- We searched for
- subject_t:Netherlands OR subject_t:Holland OR subject_ses:11867
Member
X
Douglas Alexander
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
More
Alexander, Douglas (11)
Primary member
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
Publisher
Following the rejection of the treaty in the French and Dutch referendums, the June European Council agreed unanimously on the need for a period for reflection to consider the right way forward for Europe. The position remains that the Council will return to the issue of the draft constitutional treaty at the June Council in 2006.
Following the rejection of the treaty in the French and Dutch referendums, the June European Council agreed unanimously on the need for a period for reflection to consider the right way forward for Europe. The position remains that the Council will return to the issue of the draft constitutional treaty at the June Council in 2006.
Answered by
Douglas Alexander
(Labour)
Asked by
James Duddridge
(Conservative)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Oral answers to questions
If he will make a statement on the future of the European constitution.
Subjects
EU countries; European Constitution Treaty; France; Referendums; Netherlands
Date
29 November 2005
Reference
440 c120-1
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
I certainly agree that people in both France and the Netherlands were voting on the text, and we need to respect the judgment that they reached. The broader context of how Europe can meet the challenges of globalisation explains the broader conversation in which European leaders engaged when they met at Hampton Court in October.
I certainly agree that people in both France and the Netherlands were voting on the text, and we need to respect the judgment that they reached. The broader context of how Europe can meet the challenges of globalisation explains the broader conversation in which European leaders engaged when they met at Hampton Court in October.
Answered by
Douglas Alexander
(Labour)
Asked by
Wayne David
(Labour)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Oral answers to questions
Does the Minister agree that, rather than concentrate on what people might view as abstract issues of constitutional detail, there should be an emphasis on bringing home to the British people the benefits of EU membership?
Subjects
EU countries; European Constitution Treaty; France; Referendums; Netherlands
Date
29 November 2005
Reference
440 c122
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
That was a worthy attempt, but the position of the British Government has been set out several times in the House and elsewhere. The draft constitutional treaty would be ratified by means of a referendum in the United Kingdom, but the right hon. Gentleman is right to recognise that there needs to be a legal basis for decisions taken by the European Commission and, indeed, by the other institutions of the EU. That continues to be the case, notwithstanding the period of reflection for the constitutional treaty.
That was a worthy attempt, but the position of the British Government has been set out several times in the House and elsewhere. The draft constitutional treaty would be ratified by means of a referendum in the United Kingdom, but the right hon. Gentleman is right to recognise that there needs to be a legal basis for decisions taken by the European Commission and, indeed, by the other institutions of the EU. That continues to be the case, notwithstanding the period of reflection for the constitutional treaty.
Answered by
Douglas Alexander
(Labour)
Asked by
Lord Redwood
(Conservative)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Oral answers to questions
As the EU presses on with the defence agency, criminal law code and the strengthening of foreign policy in many other crucial elements of the constitution, should not the Prime Minister keep his word to this House and the British people by holding a referendum in this country before the constitution returns to the EU agenda next year? The promise was unequivocal: we were told that we would have a referendum irrespective of what other countries did.
Subjects
EU countries; European Constitution Treaty; France; Referendums; Netherlands
Date
29 November 2005
Reference
440 c122
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
The hon. Gentleman may be aware that my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has, on behalf of the European Union, written to the United States Secretary of State on exactly that matter.
The hon. Gentleman may be aware that my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has, on behalf of the European Union, written to the United States Secretary of State on exactly that matter.
Answered by
Douglas Alexander
(Labour)
Asked by
Angus Robertson
(Scottish National Party)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Oral answers to questions
Will the Minister confirm that existing treaties and EU rules remain in force, including guarantees on the rule of law, democracy and human rights? What is the UK presidency doing to clarify the serious allegations about detention camps and rendition flights, which are surely against all decent standards?
Subjects
EU countries; European Constitution Treaty; France; Referendums; Netherlands
Date
29 November 2005
Reference
440 c121
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
My hon. Friend's question contains a number of points. First, the judgment that the British Government reached, in the light of the decisive rejection in France and the Netherlands, was that the best use of the time during the British presidency was to engage in a broader conversation about the future of Europe. That explains the agenda that we set for the Hampton Court meeting in October in relation to specific future reforms of the European Union. Of course we have made substantive reforms in policy areas—for example, on the sugar regime, as was mentioned earlier—but in the coming six months further reflection is needed on the correct way forward, not least given the disparate range of opinions now being expressed in Europe on the future of the constitutional treaty.
My hon. Friend's question contains a number of points. First, the judgment that the British Government reached, in the light of the decisive rejection in France and the Netherlands, was that the best use of the time during the British presidency was to engage in a broader conversation about the future of Europe. That explains the agenda that we set for the Hampton Court meeting in October in relation to specific future reforms of the European Union. Of course we have made substantive reforms in policy areas—for example, on the sugar regime, as was mentioned earlier—but in the coming six months further reflection is needed on the correct way forward, not least given the disparate range of opinions now being expressed in Europe on the future of the constitutional treaty.
Answered by
Douglas Alexander
(Labour)
Asked by
Keith Vaz
(Labour)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Oral answers to questions
Clearly a period of reflection is in the interests of the whole of the European Union. However, there are elements of the constitution that match Britain's reform agenda. Is my right hon. Friend confident that during our presidency we have achieved what we set out to achieve in connection with reforming the structure of the EU? Will he assure the House that if we do not get those agreements by the end of the presidency, he and the Foreign Secretary will pursue this agenda until the EU is made more efficient and effective, irrespective of what happens to the constitution?
Subjects
EU countries; European Constitution Treaty; France; Referendums; Netherlands
Date
29 November 2005
Reference
440 c121
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
The Prime Minister has now met the incoming Chancellor of Germany, but it is to state the obvious to say that it is ultimately for the Germans to reach a decision on the ratification of the draft constitutional treaty on behalf of the German people, just as it is the perfect entitlement of the British Government, and ultimately the British Parliament, to reach a judgment on the right response of the United Kingdom to the decisive rejection of that treaty last spring by the French and the Dutch.
The Prime Minister has now met the incoming Chancellor of Germany, but it is to state the obvious to say that it is ultimately for the Germans to reach a decision on the ratification of the draft constitutional treaty on behalf of the German people, just as it is the perfect entitlement of the British Government, and ultimately the British Parliament, to reach a judgment on the right response of the United Kingdom to the decisive rejection of that treaty last spring by the French and the Dutch.
Answered by
Douglas Alexander
(Labour)
Asked by
James Duddridge
(Conservative)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Oral answers to questions
What discussions has the Minister had with his counterparts in Germany, given that Chancellor Merkel has said that she wants to press ahead with the constitution, but the British public clearly do not want it?
Subjects
EU countries; European Constitution Treaty; France; Referendums; Netherlands
Date
29 November 2005
Reference
440 c121
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
I think that the cheers of Conservative Members reflect the candour with which my hon. Friend has revealed his true agenda, which underlies so many of the questions that he asks—not only in Foreign Office questions but in wider debates on the issue. It is, however, continually the case and remains the case that the draft constitutional treaty was agreed by 25 member states, so it is not the role of any one member state to declare it dead. That explains the unanimous decision that was reached back in June, which will be the basis of further conversations in the European Council next spring.
I think that the cheers of Conservative Members reflect the candour with which my hon. Friend has revealed his true agenda, which underlies so many of the questions that he asks—not only in Foreign Office questions but in wider debates on the issue. It is, however, continually the case and remains the case that the draft constitutional treaty was agreed by 25 member states, so it is not the role of any one member state to declare it dead. That explains the unanimous decision that was reached back in June, which will be the basis of further conversations in the European Council next spring.
Answered by
Douglas Alexander
(Labour)
Asked by
Kelvin Hopkins
(Labour)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Type
Oral answers to questions
Given the reality that the constitution is as dead as the Monty Python parrot, would it not be better for Britain to propose a more sensible alternative—the idea that, in future, Europe should be an association of independent, democratic states responsible for their own internal affairs—[Hon. Members: ““Hear, hear.””]—co-operating only where there is mutual benefit to be gained?
Subjects
EU countries; European Constitution Treaty; France; Referendums; Netherlands
Date
29 November 2005
Reference
440 c122
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
If he will make a statement on the future of the European constitution.
If he will make a statement on the future of the European constitution.
Asked by
James Duddridge
(Conservative)
Answered by
Douglas Alexander
(Labour)
Answering body
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
Tabled on
23 November 2005
For answer on
29 November 2005
Answered on
29 November 2005
Following the rejection of the treaty in the French and Dutch referendums, the June European Council agreed unanimously on the need for a period for reflection to consider the right way forward for Europe. The position remains that the Council will return to the issue of the draft constitutional treaty at the June Council in 2006.
Subjects
EU countries; European Constitution Treaty; France; Referendums; Netherlands
Date
29 November 2005
Reference
440 c120-1; 32391
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, pursuant to her Answer of 1st May 2002, 384 c792W, what discussions between Consignia and parties other than the Dutch post office regarding a possible sale of, merger with, or equity investment in, Consignia have taken place in the last...
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, pursuant to her Answer of 1st May 2002, 384 c792W, what discussions between Consignia and parties other than the Dutch post office regarding a possible sale of, merger with, or equity investment in, Consignia have taken place in the last...
Asked by
Lord Hammond of Runnymede
(Conservative)
Answered by
Douglas Alexander
(Labour)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
2 May 2002
For answer on
13 May 2002
Answered on
13 May 2002
Mr. Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, pursuant to her answer of 1 May 2002, Official Report, column
792W, what discussions between Consignia and parties other than the Dutch post office regarding a possible sale of, merger with, or
equity investment in, Consignia have taken place in the last 12 months. [55012]
Mr. Alexander: Apart from the negotiations with TPG about a possible merger as set out in my answer on 1 May 2002, Official Report,
column 792W, the Department have not been notified, during the last 12 months, about any discussions between Consignia and other
parties regarding a possible sale of equity, merger or equity investment.
Subjects
Mergers; Postal services; Consignia; Netherlands; TPG
Date
13 May 2002
Reference
55012; 385 c463W
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, when she was notified by the management of Consignia of negotiations which have taken place within the last 12 months regarding a potential sale of an equity share in the business.
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, when she was notified by the management of Consignia of negotiations which have taken place within the last 12 months regarding a potential sale of an equity share in the business.
Asked by
Lord Hammond of Runnymede
(Conservative)
Answered by
Douglas Alexander
(Labour)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
16 April 2002
For answer on
1 May 2002
Answered on
1 May 2002
Mr. Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when she was notified by the management of Consignia of
negotiations which have taken place within the last 12 months regarding a potential sale of an equity share in the business.
[51244]
Mr. Alexander: In the last 12 months, Consignia notified the Department about its intention to explore the possibility of a merger
of its postal activities with the Dutch Post Office (TPG) in June last year. Talks commenced in July but have ceased as no
satisfactory agreement was reached.
Subjects
Mergers; Postal services; Consignia; Netherlands
Date
1 May 2002
Reference
51244; 384 c792-3W
House
House of Commons
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, whether her Department has had talks with the Dutch postal company TPG in the past year.
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, whether her Department has had talks with the Dutch postal company TPG in the past year.
Asked by
Lord Cryer
(Labour)
Answered by
Douglas Alexander
(Labour)
Answering body
Department of Trade and Industry
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Tabled on
11 April 2002
For answer on
1 May 2002
Answered on
1 May 2002
John Cryer: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether her Department has had talks with the Dutch postal company
TPG in the past year. [49945]
Mr. Alexander: The Department has met representatives of the Dutch postal company, TPG, on a limited number of occasions to examine
specific aspects of a possible merger of Consignia's postal activities with them. No satisfactory agreement was reached between the
companies on a merger and Ministers therefore agreed with the company that discussions should cease.
Since the Government have given Consignia commercial freedom, within the public sector, it is entirely appropriate that Consignia
has been considering its commercial strategy, including the possibility of relationships or joint ventures with other operators.
Subjects
Mergers; Postal services; Consignia; Netherlands; TPG
Date
1 May 2002
Reference
49945; 384 c792W
House
House of Commons