UK Parliament / Open data

Treaty of Lisbon (No. 2)

Proceeding contribution from Alan Duncan (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 30 January 2008. It occurred during Debates on treaty on Treaty of Lisbon (No. 2).
No, I am going to move on now. The Government have consistently claimed that the substantial difference between the ill-fated constitution and the Lisbon treaty rules out the requirement for a referendum. Luckily, both documents are readily available in the Vote Office, so it is possible to waste a few hours searching for any disparities. Alternatively, one could simply review the work of the European Scrutiny Committee, which simply states baldly that the two documents are ““substantially equivalent””. I was going to have some fun pointing out the equivalences in more detail, but in the area of energy, the real significance lies in what has been sneaked into the Lisbon treaty that was not in the constitution. What we see are not substantial revisions but additional provisions. Thus the only respect in which it is not the same is where it has been made much worse. For example, in article 122 of the constitution that I have in front of me, we read:"““Without prejudice to any other provisions provided for in this Treaty, the Council, acting by a qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission, may decide upon the measures appropriate to the economic situation, in particular if severe difficulties arise in the supply of certain products””." In article 100, ““acting by qualified majority”” becomes"““in a spirit of solidarity””." Article 100 also adds the coda"““notably in the area of energy””," by which the drafters almost certainly mean primarily in the area of energy. Let us return to the phrase ““spirit of solidarity””, which also appears in new article 176A. Again, let us make the terms absolutely clear to the House. That provision mandates the Council to redistribute energy across the bloc during times of crisis. A gas dispute in Bavaria could ultimately lead to gas rationing in Birmingham. If there is an interruption in the supplies from the Gulf, the Commission can override our contracts. It can cut off our supplies from Milford Haven and send them to Ingolstadt, or divert our liquefied natural gas from the Isle of Grain to Novo Mesto. [Interruption.] The Minister may mock, but the point is not ridiculous because the words of the treaty are what matters.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
471 c346-7 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Back to top