European Union Bill

With the Prime Minister. In particular, I agree with his speech on 4 November 2009, in which he said:"““We must be sure that the measures included in the Lisbon Treaty will not bring creeping control over our criminal justice system by EU judges. We will want to prevent EU judges gaining steadily greater control over our criminal justice system by negotiating an arrangement which would protect it. That will mean limiting the European Court of Justice's jurisdiction over criminal law to its pre-Lisbon level, and ensuring that only British authorities can initiate criminal investigations in Britain.””" I would like to put on the record how much I agree with that position, and how much I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Esher and Walton (Mr Raab). Why are we discussing further opt-ins in this Committee, when we should be considering how to recapture a sense of control and our national way of life in relation to the criminal justice system? I am particularly concerned that in evidence to the European Scrutiny Committee, the Minister said that there is a strict time limit of three months for our opt-in, and that that is what the protocol states. The written statement says:"““As currently, the Government will not override the scrutiny process unless an earlier opt-in decision is essential.””" Presumably that relates to the three months. The statement goes on:"““Where the Government consider an early opt-in to be necessary, it will explain its reasons to Parliament through the statement set out above. In these circumstances, it would usually be appropriate for the statement to be made orally.””—[Official Report, 20 January 2011; Vol. 521, c. 52WS.]" That suggests that the statement could be a written statement. I am concerned, as are my constituents, about further Europeanisation of border control under things like the Schengen agreement. Yes, that is subject to a referendum, but my constituents specifically do not want to see further integration through Schengen and in the criminal justice system. I feel passionate about this matter. I press the Minister to say in his response whether the three-month position is correct. I have taken the time to read the protocol. It is true that article 3 of the protocol states:"““The United Kingdom or Ireland may notify the President of the Council in writing, within three months after a proposal or initiative has been presented to the Council pursuant to Title V of Part Three of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, that it wishes to take part in the adoption and application””." However, I am troubled by one thing, which I hope the Minister will clarify. Article 4 states:"““The United Kingdom or Ireland may at any time after the adoption of a measure by the Council pursuant to Title V of Part Three of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union notify its intention to the Council and to the Commission that it wishes to accept that measure.””" I would like the Minister to clarify why there is such a crashing hurry on this matter, and whether there really has to be a crashing hurry. Is it because there has to be negotiation in Europe, or for some other reason? I hope that the Government will give further consideration to tightening up the statement and to introducing measures on Report that would give further confidence that the House will have a say on these most sensitive of issues—the criminal justice system and the control of our borders. This is one of the most central concerns of my constituents. I hope that Ministers will ensure that we will have proper scrutiny of any such measures.