I have never claimed that the article would be a means of deploying troops from a member state that is not in the permanent structured co-operation. I have never said that. However, let us suppose that it became the policy of a permanent structured co-operation to send a new force to a new theatre of war. Let us suppose that a member state in the permanent structured co-operation did wish to do that. The member state either has a veto over the operation or, if it had already been excluded for other reasons, no say over the European Union’s making a military deployment in its name. What could be clearer than that? Why do the arrangements exist if they are not to enable the EU to make more decisions without single member states being able to obstruct them with their vetoes? That is the reason for including the protocol.
European Union (Amendment) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Bernard Jenkin
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 3 March 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on European Union (Amendment) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
472 c1543 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 23:38:25 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_450828
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_450828
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_450828