I do not think that the noble Lord behind me can intervene on an intervention by the noble Lord opposite. Let me deal with one load of trouble at a time.
I have an awful feeling that this debate will go on a lot longer than I ever intended. It was not me who opened up all the questions raised by the noble Lord, Lord Hannay; he raised the matters and I responded to them. I have an awful feeling that if I am too generous in my reply to him, I will be very unpopular, so let us get on with the proposition that I am advancing, which is simply this: if there is no referendum, it makes it that much more likely that there will be returned to Parliament a party with a clear mandate to renegotiate parts of the treaty, and that in office there will be a Government in a position to secure the passage through Parliament of legislation which reflects the people’s wishes. If a party had a clear mandate to renegotiate, it would be pretty fruitless to enter a renegotiation unless we had put down a few markers and said, ““This is the part of the treaty to which we objected. This is the part of the treaty which was never put to the people. We have passed legislation in the English Parliament making sure that the social chapter is to be repealed””. The consequence of that process might be success or failure, but that is entirely irrelevant so far as the amendment is concerned. Quite simply, this amendment, which I would have moved in far shorter terms had I not been so generous to all those who have intervened, is designed to make sure that, in the circumstances that I have mentioned, our courts would accept the right of Parliament to legislate even when the legislation was in conflict with the 1972 Act. They certainly would not treat the legislation as being other than of no effect if there had not been a clear statement of the intention of Parliament that such legislation should override the 1972 Act. That is the simple purpose of the amendment. I beg to move.
[Amendment No. 122, as an amendment to Amendment No. 121, not moved.]
European Union (Amendment) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Waddington
(Conservative)
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 c1092 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:17:31 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_472857
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_472857
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_472857