I am extremely grateful to the Home Secretary for giving way; it may just help to tease out one of the key issues. I have no objection to the United Kingdom getting involved, as was debated a moment ago, in that particular area. However, does she not see a distinction between getting involved under the existing provision—a mere international treaty obligation—and getting involved under the opt-in provisions that, once the treaty is in force, place the obligations and their enforceability into the hands of the European Court of Justice and the Commission?
I would just like a view from the Home Secretary on whether she sees any difference between the two mechanisms. The issue may well be where the real difference between us lies; I suggest to her that there is an enormous difference between the two concepts in respect of the maintenance of national rights and sovereignty over those issues.
Lisbon Treaty (No.1)
Proceeding contribution from
Dominic Grieve
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 29 January 2008.
It occurred during Debates on treaty on Lisbon Treaty (No.1).
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
471 c180-1 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:47:08 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_440215
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_440215
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_440215