I thank my right hon. and learned Friend for giving way on this Lugano point. I agree with everything he says: it should be treated as a discrete treaty, separate from us leaving the EU, and it is very important for our future trade. But if that is the case, why does he not mention Lugano on the face of the Bill? By doing so, he could perhaps limit the scope of the wide statutory instrument powers—the so-called Henry VIII powers—that I think he will talk about bringing back. He would then have the specific Bill that would make the other place a bit happier.
Private International Law (Implementation of Agreements) Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Jonathan Djanogly
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 2 September 2020.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Private International Law (Implementation of Agreements) Bill [Lords].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
679 c218 
Session
2019-21
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-28 07:38:19 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-09-02/20090223000167
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-09-02/20090223000167
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-09-02/20090223000167