UK Parliament / Open data

European Union (Amendment) Bill

The right hon. Gentleman thinks that there is a fundamental difference between the documents, but my argument is that there is no fundamental difference between them. Let me complete the answer to that, and I shall come to his second point in due course. Faced with that onslaught of evidence and analysis from independent commentators and Committees of this House, the promise breakers have made their last stand on one forlorn but intriguing argument—the ““mouse”” argument, originally introduced, I think, by the hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton. [Interruption.] The hon. Gentleman will explain later who originally came up with it. That argument concedes that the Lisbon treaty is indeed 90 per cent., or thereabouts, the same as the constitution, ““But,”” it goes on, with an air of triumph inappropriate to the facts available, ““a mouse is 90 per cent. genetically the same as a human being, and it is the 10 per cent. difference that really counts.”” The difference between a man and a mouse is indeed a fascinating question, and if Liberal Democrat Front Benchers vote for a referendum tonight, the performance of their leader might be part of the analysis of that difference. Even if we bend over backwards to accommodate that view, however, by no stretch of the imagination do the changes made between the two documents turn the man-like constitution into the mouse-like treaty of Lisbon. Compared with the constitution, the Lisbon treaty contains some improvements, such as the explicit ruling out of European Court of Justice competence in foreign policy and the six words on climate change, which we debated last week. They are nice to have, but they make no material difference to the policies, powers or procedures of the EU. The changes between the constitution and the Lisbon treaty also take one important step backwards—the removal of the commitment to undistorted competition within the EU from the overriding objectives of the European treaties—but the vast majority of the rest is the same.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
472 c1770;472 c1768 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Back to top