No. If the right hon. Gentleman was following my argument, he would know that I was simply illustrating a point. Powers in a treaty become subject to interpretation by a supreme court, and if that supreme court is part of the central authority it starts to see matters and interpret treaty provisions in a way that is detrimental to the interests of member states, in this case, and in favour of the interests of the central institution. We already see that activism in the European Court of Justice. I was pointing out that that process in America undermined the rights of states and asserted the powers of the federal Government to such an extent that they—the federal Government—declared war on a seceding state. I do not suppose that that will ever happen in the EU, but I was making the point that an accretion of powers to the centre aided by an activist court is happening in the EU in the same way as it did in the USA. I do not want to push the other parallels to breaking point.
European Union (Amendment) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
David Heathcoat-Amory
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 29 January 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on European Union (Amendment) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
471 c267-8 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 02:02:00 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_440503
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_440503
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_440503