European Union (Amendment) Bill

For some people, the SNP is the bogeyman, but not for others. The European Court of Justice—that is the bogeyman, an organisation that is going to come along and somehow do bad things in the name of justice. Because it is European justice is it bad? Is that the equation? If it is British justice, is it all right? Go and ask people how we treated them within our empire. Ask people now, who are denied justice—for example, children are locked up in Dungavel in Scotland and in other places. That is British justice. British justice is opted out of the UN convention on the rights of the child so that we can lock up asylum seekers' children. That is British justice. The EU, I hope, will come along and say that that is not acceptable, and that we cannot do it. In fact, the latest Commission report says that we are in breach of the rights of the child across Europe, so we have to think about whether our justice system is better than any other. What is wrong with justice? Two weeks ago, I spoke with Professor Sir David Edward, who, being an ECJ judge, is a leading figure in jurisprudence in Scotland. Nothing that he said about justice, his view of justice and Europe's view of justice made me afraid of this organisation, the ECJ. The idea of justice is for everyone within the EU. That is what we can contribute. Why should positive parts of the UK's perception of justice, as put forward earlier, not be available to everyone throughout the EU? Why should it not be available to an enlarged EU, which we have at the moment, or to Turkey, Croatia or any other country that wants to come and join us? I do not think that there is anything wrong with that. I want to finish on the power of the European Parliament. Look at the article 289 of the consolidated treaty:"““The ordinary legislative procedure shall consist in the joint adoption by the European Parliament and the Council of a regulation, directive or decision on a proposal from the Commission.””" The European Parliament and the Council are involved. The European Parliament is a democratic organisation. If it is not good enough for purpose, make it better. That is our job as parliamentarians and as citizens. The article goes on to say in paragraph 4:"““In the specific cases provided for by the Treaties, legislative acts may be adopted on the initiative of a group of Member States or of the European Parliament””." So, it gives elements of the generation of law not just to the Commission, but to member states. If we think something should be done as a collective, we should be able to put that suggestion forward, take it to the Council and the European Parliament, and bring it in as legislation. Not only the Commission is involved, so that is an advance on the idea of the plutocrats running everything. I want the House to pass the Bill and implement the treaty. I want the people of the UK to participate through this Parliament and through their representatives in the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Assembly and the Northern Ireland Assembly. I want them to participate in any other way that they can. That is not a one-way system; I see it as a resolution of forces. There is a new force—the European Parliament. The Commission, the Council, the European Parliament, the devolved Parliaments and the Parliament of the United Kingdom are all involved, as are all the other Parliaments of Europe, and there is a resolution of political forces for us to work on. That is what the treaty gives us the chance to do. It is for our constituents, for the future of Europe and for the families that we represent.