| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
6.30 pm
Earl Ferrers: I was trying to make the point that it was absolutely correct for the noble Lord to be wary of them. It is undesirable to make lists and it is even more undesirable to make lists which can be amended by order. We would end up with a whole lot of new bureaucracy. The noble Lord would be much better to stick to his original advice not to have lists.
Viscount Astor: Perhaps I may ask the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, a question that he has not yet touched on. I asked him about membership. He said that there is a definition of “international organisation” which is recognised by law, but I wonder whether there is such a clear definition of what it is to be a member of an organisation. There can be various shades of being a
24 Apr 2008 : Column 1754
Lord Goodhart: I do not want to go into too much detail now but I think that there is a fairly clear and well established precedent for what constitutes an organisation of this kind. It is not just an agreement between two, or perhaps more than two, countries to do something together; it is an agreement that involves setting up an organisation which has membership, the members being, or including, states—in this case, the United Kingdom being one of those states.
The Earl of Caithness: Having listened to this debate, which I find fascinating, perhaps I may ask the noble Lord whether there is a difference in legal terms between being a member of an organisation for which the UK has ratified the agreement and being a member of an organisation for which the UK has not ratified the agreement. Does that affect the position?
Lord Goodhart: I am sorry; I missed the noble Earl’s last sentence.
The Earl of Caithness: Does that affect the position?
Lord Goodhart: I am afraid that I do not follow the noble Earl. I must have missed something a little earlier than that. I do not think that the question of what involves an international organisation of which individual states are members is particularly difficult.
Lord Howard of Rising: I thank noble Lords for their many comments but I remain completely unconvinced. I do not think that it is any good to say that it is easy to get a list when a Minister of the Government has said that it is actually very difficult, if not virtually impossible. This cannot have been looked at very seriously if we are not even sure what a member of an organisation should be, and on those grounds I should like to test the opinion of the House.
6.33 pm
On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 4), as an amendment to Amendment No. 3, shall be agreed to?
Their Lordships divided: Contents, 24; Not-Contents, 52.
Astor, V. [Teller]
Caithness, E.
De Mauley, L.
Elton, L.
Evans of Parkside, L.
Garel-Jones, L.
Geddes, L.
Glenarthur, L.
Griffiths of Fforestfach, L.
Hanningfield, L.
Howard of Rising, L.
Laird, L.
Leach of Fairford, L.
Luke, L.
Mancroft, L.
Morris of Bolton, B.
24 Apr 2008 : Column 1755
Noakes, B.
Norton of Louth, L.
O'Cathain, B.
St. John of Bletso, L.
Seccombe, B.
Selsdon, L. [Teller]
Wilcox, B.
Addington, L.
Ahmed, L.
Alderdice, L.
Barker, B.
Bew, L.
Bilston, L.
Brooke of Alverthorpe, L.
Chidgey, L.
Craigavon, V.
Davies of Coity, L.
D'Souza, B.
Dubs, L.
Dykes, L.
Falkland, V.
Falkner of Margravine, B.
Gibson of Market Rasen, B.
Glasgow, E.
Goodhart, L.
Hoyle, L.
Jacobs, L.
Janner of Braunstone, L.
Jones of Cheltenham, L.
Lea of Crondall, L.
Lee of Trafford, L.
Lipsey, L.
Low of Dalston, L.
McNally, L.
Masham of Ilton, B.
Maxton, L.
Miller of Chilthorne Domer, B.
Neuberger, B.
Newby, L.
Northover, B.
Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay, L. [Teller]
O'Neill of Clackmannan, L.
Pitkeathley, B.
Razzall, L.
Redesdale, L.
Roberts of Llandudno, L.
Rodgers of Quarry Bank, L.
Roper, L.
Shutt of Greetland, L. [Teller]
Smith of Clifton, L.
Steel of Aikwood, L.
Taverne, L.
Teverson, L.
Thomas of Gresford, L.
Tordoff, L.
Valentine, B.
Wallace of Saltaire, L.
Walmsley, B.
Watson of Invergowrie, L.
Resolved in the negative, and Amendment No. 4 disagreed to accordingly.
6.44 pm
The Lord Speaker (Baroness Hayman): Amendment No. 3 is therefore not amended.
Lord Goodhart: I do not intend to press Amendment No. 3 this evening partly because I have been informed by one of my noble friends that a committee of your Lordships’ House is in the process of drawing up a list of international organisations of which the United Kingdom is a member.
24 Apr 2008 : Column 1756
In those circumstances, further revision of Amendment No. 3 to take this factor into account is likely to be desirable. I add my thanks to the Minister for his suggestion. This would be an appropriate moment to beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Viscount Astor: The noble Lord said that he would address the point raised by the Minister about charities and NGOs, which he has not done, and which is related to his amendment.
Lord Goodhart: We will further consider that between now and Report. As I made clear, I had considered and taken a specific view on it. We will see if there is a practical way of bringing that into account in the Bill on Report.
Earl Ferrers: The noble Lord said that he knew what was happening and that he therefore did not want to include his amendment in the Bill. If not, why did he vote against the amendment to the amendment?
Lord Goodhart: Because I totally disagree with the amendment to my amendment. It was not my choice that it should be voted on; that was the choice of the noble Lord, Lord Howard of Rising. We were certainly not going to either support it or abstain. I propose to sit down very quickly before anyone else intervenes. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment No. 3, by leave, withdrawn.
Lord Bach: I beg to move that the House do now resume.
Moved accordingly and, on Question, Motion agreed to.
- House adjourned at 6.47 pm.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |