The underlying difference between us is probably how far one starts from a gut mistrust of co-operation under rules. International regulation has to imply very clear rules. The argument about the IEA versus the European Union is also about how far one lets the Americans set the rules or how far one co-operates with others to design the rules within the European market. That is an argument we had in 1973-74, as I am sure the noble Lord will remember, over the setting up of the IEA, and it is an argument that continues. I, like many of us, start from the assumption that it makes sense to co-operate most closely with our neighbours with whom we share a regional energy market. International regulation is, of course, a limitation of absolute national sovereignty. A global world economy is an invasion of national sovereignty. Foreign companies owning British energy suppliers is a limitation of national sovereignty. I recognise that, and we have to manage it.
European Union (Amendment) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Wallace of Saltaire
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 14 May 2008.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on European Union (Amendment) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
701 c1031 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:18:12 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_472754
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_472754
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_472754