European Union (Amendment) Bill

This has been a very valuable debate. I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Ludford, very much for her contribution. In Amendment No. 16A, I was seeking to ensure that the highest possible standards apply right across the European Union. If there is any question of us falling below our very high standards, the amendment would require the Minister, who is proposing that we should move in such a direction, to come to Parliament and justify it. She may have thought I was confused but I still see the issue with amazing clarity, particularly following her contribution. I say to the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart of Swindon, that he is quite right. We have to make sure that we have got our laws right. That is very much what we have just heard from the Minister, who is about to make a Government concession to accept—at least as I understand it, in principle—the amendment that has been moved in this place to the Criminal Justice Bill. I welcome that. I heard very reassuring words from her. I always think that when the Minister’s brief says, ““This amendment is wrong””, it means that there is some mistake somewhere. When the Minister says, ““This amendment is unnecessary””—that is what the noble Baroness said—that probably means that the amendment is on all fours and is absolutely correct, but at the moment the Government does not wish to accept it. Against that background I would like to retire to consider things in more detail. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. [Amendment No. 17 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.]