My Lords, I hesitate to intervene again but I am concerned that the noble Lord is suggesting that somehow the Government or the Opposition would not whip on a Motion of this kind. Let me be clear about this. I apologise if there is any misunderstanding as regards Standing Order 21. If we are wrong about the number, I will, of course, correct it. That is the number I have been given. However, I appreciate that because I am not a Member of another place I am not familiar with the numbers in the way that, sadly, I have become familiar with the Companion. The Government guarantee to make time because they have to. They cannot do anything unless they do. They do not have any power to go to Europe and negotiate anything on these passerelles without parliamentary approval in both your Lordships’ House and another place. The Government cannot do anything, therefore they have to make time. Of course, it is government time because noble Lords would no doubt complain if it was not. That is right and proper. Where this has relevance and significance in terms of other instruments is that the Government will find time, in collaboration with the usual channels, for this to be debated. Noble Lords will know that even when there are conventions that, for example, statutory instruments are not voted against, on occasion they have been. We are saying that there are no conventions here; this is new. Therefore, noble Lords can vote on it.
There is absolute clarity on this. I am worried that the noble Lord, Lord Howell, is trying almost to confuse the issue in order to bring it back. I do not accept that. It is crystal clear that in both Houses of Parliament there will be a vote and a veto by either House. It will be done under the appropriate Standing Order of another place and it will be done in your Lordships' House under the procedure I have outlined. That could not be clearer. That is the decision before your Lordships’ House: whether that is sufficient to give what I believe is effective control or whether noble Lords believe, for reasons I do not understand, that an Act of Parliament is required as well.
European Union (Amendment) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Ashton of Upholland
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 4 June 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on European Union (Amendment) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
702 c251 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 00:25:02 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_477244
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_477244
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_477244