I intend to. I had not sat down. Had I sat down, the noble Lord would be have been correct to prevent me doing do. I was addressing the issues that noble Lords raised in their deliberations that I thought gave rise to concerns that, for some noble Lords, were the reasons why they were supporting the amendment, because they feel that the Government have not done enough to consider scrutiny. However, the noble Lord is right, and I am grateful to him. I shall address his point but I shall finish the one I was making about the scrutiny procedure, because I do not think noble Lords can reach a decision on this amendment without me putting forward how the process currently works and some of the issues that we need to consider for the future. I was saying that it is rare to be able to look again at the possibilities of opting in, but it is possible. It would not be a strategy to be pursued in the main. I mention that because it was raised in the committee and I felt that this Committee should also hear that point.
However, it is time for me to wind up my remarks. I do not believe that the way forward is this amendment. I tried to indicate that by talking about the need to think strategically about justice and home affairs. Our approach to individual opt-ins would be governed to a degree by how that strategy is developed. I do not believe that the House would be best served by individual discussions on individual opt-ins. I believe it is well served and best served by the committee, which can take the strategic overview that is the most appropriate way forward. It has the power to bring forward to the House, if it so wishes, issues of concern and to suggest to the House that it should debate them. I know that noble Lords will not underestimate the importance and value of the committee; nor should they underestimate the value that the committee has within government. Noble Lords will be aware that those of us who have had the privilege of working with the committee in this area take great note and pay great attention to what is being said.
My response to the amendment was not just to be negative about it but to look for alternative ways in which we can ensure the best possible scrutiny, so that noble Lords can rest assured that the House will play an appropriate role. We believe that that is through the committee. I therefore hope the noble Lord will withdraw his amendment.
European Union (Amendment) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Ashton of Upholland
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 20 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 c1373 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:45:15 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_474915
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_474915
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_474915