European Union (Amendment) Bill

I am grateful to the hon. and learned Gentleman for giving way for a second time on this point; it is clearly important to him. Article 8C is headed ““National Parliaments contribute actively to the good functioning of the Union””. Let us leave aside for the moment our disagreement, in which he thinks that that is mandatory and I think that it is descriptive. It goes on:"““by seeing to it that the principle of subsidiarity is respected in accordance with the procedures provided for in the…Protocol””." As a distinguished lawyer, he must surely admit that the European Court of Justice could rule on whether a national Parliament had breached this—in my view—non-existent duty only if a case were brought. But brought by whom? By the Commission? Does he really believe in the bizarre fantasy—which the right hon. Member for Wells (Mr. Heathcoat-Amory) clearly shares—that the Commission, which is given a duty in the treaty to keep national Parliaments informed, would take a national Parliament to the European Court of Justice for failing to express its opinion on whether the Commission had acted in accordance with the principles of subsidiarity? That is complete nonsense, and, in my view, the hon. and learned Gentleman should move on to something more substantial.