| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Campbell-Savours: My Lords, will the noble Lord give way? Can he explain to us whether it will require changes in the Standing Orders of the other House? What is the advice from the Clerk?
The Chairman of Committees: My Lords, the Commons resolution which I quoted gives that right. So there is no need for a change to Standing Orders. It states:
- "Notwithstanding Standing Order No. 86, the standing committee shall consist of those Members of the House nominated for the time being to the European Scrutiny Committee . . . and to the Foreign Affairs Committee . . . together with the Parliamentary Representatives".
I hope that that deals with most of the queries raised.
Lord Howell of Guildford: My Lords, like the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart of Swindon, I am not clear—I do not think many noble Lords are—whether we are debating what the noble Lord, Lord Tordoff, described as "part" of the arrangements for monitoring and looking into the convention, or whether we will debate that on the next Motion. Can he clarify which it is? Like others, we would like to develop the important wider points which arise from the initial Motion.
Lord Williams of Mostyn: My Lords, as the Chairman of Committees indicated at the outset, the substantive question is presently being discussed. Thereafter I shall move a purely formal, consequential Motion.
Lord Howell of Guildford: My Lords, that is extremely helpful. Many noble Lords raised fundamental issues, rightly so, about the broader way, of which this is only part, by which your Lordships' House, with all its vast accumulated experience and expertise on European affairs, can contribute in an ongoing and interactive way—this is not supposed to be a one-way hand-me-down to us from the convention—to the issues being shaped by the convention.
We are left in no doubt that huge issues of fundamental importance to our democratic future are being discussed. Apparently a new basic treaty is being drawn up along with new human rights legislation to replace the European Convention on Human Rights. A working group on the role of Parliament has been set up. I do not know what that is looking at or whether we have been asked to make contributions. A new President of the Council of Ministers has been proposed. The Commission has produced 50 ideas about what to do. All that is rolling past us at this moment.
We have the excellent European Union Committee which has had one hearing with the four delegates—they are called representatives but that is incorrect; they are, if anything, delegates. That was an extremely interesting hearing. At that hearing the noble Lord, Lord Tomlinson, acutely observed that national parliaments believe themselves to be underweighted and under-represented in the convention. He went on to say that he felt they were being given the status of "visiting gypsies". That is not an encouraging start to what is supposed to be the involvement of our national parliaments, including this House, in the work of the convention.
The European Union Committee had that excellent hearing. It is to have a hearing with the Minister shortly, as my noble friend Lord Brabazon said. It will produce a report at the end of the summer. I suppose that means we may have a chance of debating this topic, if the Government can find time, in October. But meanwhile a massive number of major issues will have begun to form, be set and be discussed elsewhere, but not here. Is the Lord Privy Seal really satisfied that that is an adequate opportunity for your Lordships' House as a whole to contribute to this enormously important work, where decisions are to be made for which, in years to come, we shall be blamed if we have not raised our voices at the right time?
3.45 p.m.
Lord Barnett: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble and learned friend for his intervention. It is clear that if we approve the second report, the Leader of the House will move a resolution which will then allow Members of your Lordships' House to attend a Standing Committee of another place. I am not happy with what has been described as a "useful experiment". I do not believe it will be useful at all.
We should at least think again about this, if we do not reject it altogether, to consider whether we need this "favour" or whether we should leave it to our excellent European Union Select Committee and, if necessary, an additional sub-committee, to look at the whole issue. We do not need to be minority players. Noble Lords who have had experience of the other place and its Standing Committees will know that any Members of your Lordships' House slipping down there to say hello but with no power to vote or anything else will not be listened to. I should like my
noble and learned friend to speak in the ear of the Chairman of Committees and suggest that he withdraw this Motion for the time being.
Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe: My Lords, as a member of the European Union Select Committee, perhaps I may make a brief intervention and ask whether our committee asked the Minister for Europe whether we could have joint reporting arrangements, provided those did not undermine our already existing arrangements.
The Chairman of Committees: My Lords, the answer is probably yes. I look upon this whole matter as being an addition to the process which would normally take place. Clearly I am not part of the usual channels and I am not part of the Government's programme. The noble Lord, Lord Howell, will understand that.
I hope that the Government will provide time for proper discussion on what the noble Lord, Lord Howell of Guildford, rightly said is a vital issue. From my experience on the European Select Committee I saw this in the beginning. My views on it do not need to be recorded here and now. I have views which are on the record from the past. There is no doubt that this is something this House must take seriously.
I am sure that our Select Committee will do a first-class job in sifting the evidence which is coming forward. We must bear in mind that the purpose of the Standing Committee is to take reports. It will not make any decisions on those reports. It will still be up to us to consider the matter in as much detail as we possibly can in the period between now and later in the year. Again, the noble Lord, Lord Howell of Guildford, is correct in saying that things can be set in concrete while we are watching them dry if we are not careful. It is important therefore that the House uses its facilities through our admirable Select Committee to ensure that the matter is debated as widely as possible.
Lord Peyton of Yeovil: My Lords, will the noble Lord apply his mind to the question asked by the noble Lord, Lord Barnett? Will he consider withdrawing this Motion now—he may come back to it tomorrow if that is the right way to go—in order to discuss the views expressed today before pressing the House to accept it? I would not be of a mind to do so today.
Lord Stoddart of Swindon: My Lords, perhaps I may intervene. I asked specifically whether, because this was an innovation, all noble Lords should be written to individually with an explanation of what the Motion is all about; what they can and cannot do; how long the committee will last and whether all of us—I take it that that is the proposition—can go along and attend those meetings. This debate has been rather confusing. I believe that individual Members should be informed of exactly what it is about.
The Chairman of Committees: My Lords, I am sorry if the noble Lord is confused by the debate. The short answer to whether noble Lords should receive a letter on the subject is no. Members of your Lordships'
House have plenty of opportunities to become informed: by reading Hansard, by looking at the forthcoming business, by reading notices on noticeboards, or by reading the reports of our Select Committee. To write letters to every Member of your Lordships' House would be over-egging the pudding.In reply to the noble Lord, Lord Peyton, I do not see what variant there could be on the Motion that is before the House. This is the position; this is the decision of the Procedure Committee. It may be right or it may be wrong, but I would be sorry if we turned down the opportunity to participate in the procedures at the other end of the building where Members of your Lordships' House—this answers the other question put by the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart—can see matters evolve. I hope that noble Lords will not resist the Motion. I commend the Motion to the House.
On Question, Motion agreed to.
Convention on the Future of Europe
3.51 p.m.
Lord Williams of Mostyn: My Lords, I beg to move the Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.
Moved to resolve, That the Commons Message of 13th June be now considered; that the Alternate Representatives to the Convention on the Future of Europe appointed by this House may make statements and answer questions on the discharge of their responsibilities in the Standing Committee on the Convention appointed by the Commons; and that they and any other Lord may participate in the committee's proceedings, but may not vote or move any Motion or be counted in the quorum.—(Lord Williams of Mostyn.)
On Question, Motion agreed to; and a Message was ordered to be sent to the Commons to acquaint them therewith.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page