European Union (Amendment) Bill

It may be that the noble Lord, Lord Maclennan, and others favour this project of European integration—I associate myself there with the remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart. The process of European integration, the EU, is a completely different thing from the Europe of nation states which we all love and support. Legal personality is, to some of us, the most important aspect of the new treaty. Today, Bruno Waterfield of the Daily Telegraph quotes from various bureaucrats involved in drawing up the new constitutional position. He quotes one of these bureaucrats as saying: "““A lot people are just beginning to realise what they have signed up to””." One EU official said that the Lisbon treaty was, "““more profound and far-reaching than anything else in the EU’s 50 year history … for us here it is the most important time in our lives. There has never been such a constellation of jobs and institutional changes aligned at the same moment. A lot of people are talking about a new epoch””." That is what is going on in Brussels. It is underlined and supported by the new legal personality, which is regarded as the jewel in the crown in many of the corridors there. I do not know whether the Leader of the House is aware that the proposal for legal personality for the whole European Union—as opposed to just for the Commission in trade matters and so on which we agree has been there since 1972—was vetoed by Chancellor Kohl at Maastricht. He thought that it gave the European Union too much power. That power will, in the end, be exercised by the Luxembourg Court of Justice on whose judicial activism we have already commented in these proceedings and doubtless we will return to them. In the draft constitution, the wording for legal personality was that the EU, "““shall have legal personality superior to that of the member states””." However, in the final version the last seven words were amended, in order, I understand, not to expose this huge advance of the EU’s power too clearly to the unhappy public. Can the Minister tell us what limits are put on this new legal personality? The noble Lord, Lord Howell, has already mentioned that the pillars—justice and home affairs, and the common, foreign and security policy—are now gathered under this legal personality. Perhaps the best way of asking the Minister that question is to quote two Written Answers she sent to me on 28 February this year when I asked: "““On which areas of United Kingdom national life the European Union is not able to legislate””." I also asked her: "““On which new areas of United Kingdom national life the European Union will be able to legislate if the Lisbon Treaty is ratified””.—[Official Report, 28/2/08; col. WA 133.]" The noble Baroness has not yet answered that question. It would be helpful if she did so this evening, because it would enable us to define the borders of this new power, which we maintain do not exist. In the end, this power confers on the European Union, supported by the Court, almost unlimited power, bearing in mind the European Charter of Fundamental Rights and various other aspects of the treaty. I will quote the noble Baroness’s Answer to her, in case she does not have it to hand: "““For the first time the Lisbon Treaty defines the Union’s competences, setting out where the EU can and cannot act””." We will come to that later. Then she says: "““These competences are set out in Article 2(12) of the Treaty of Lisbon … presented to Parliament in December 2007. The treaty explicitly states that competences not conferred on the EU remain with member states””.—[Official Report, 28/2/08; col. WA 133.]" What are those competences? What remains with the member states in which the EU cannot interfere at all when it has this new overarching legal personality that is superior to that of the member states?