European Union (Accessions) Bill

I am very grateful to the Minister for his detailed and courteous reply to the points that I made in opening this short debate. Perhaps I should just explain again for the noble Lord, Lord Hannay, that in putting down an amendment which, if carried, would have rather drastic effects, one’s aim simply was to air certain views. It is often necessary in these debates, just as we are told that at times one has to reculer pour mieux sauter, sometimes one has to sauter pour mieux reculer as well. Therefore, I was anxious to establish a few of these points. Finally, I have never begrudged the need for extra help for the accession states and the ex-communist states of Europe in order to help them into a better world, although I think that their best hope is less through outside subventions than through their own enterprise and dynamism of which they have considerable quantities which they are now demonstrating. But we were led to believe by the Government that if there was extra help it would be paid for within the existing budget by reductions in farm support and not by paying an extra £2.5 billion a year ourselves. So I think that there is a little concern at the way that the whole matter has fallen out. But, that said, we have had an opportunity for this debate. I now complete my remarks because the clause stands without objection. Clause 1 agreed to. Clause 2 [Freedom of movement for workers]: