On the 'opt-ins' the Government seems determined not to include any language in the actual EU Bill that would require it to get Parliamentary approval before it can opt in to a new EU law in crime, policing and immigration. Instead, it says that this should be addressed separately with the details to be decided at a later stage. Crucially, only the proposals generating a "particularly strong" interest could, possibly, be put to Parliament. In the Government's words:
in circumstances where there is particularly strong Parliamentary interest in the Government’s decision on whether or not to opt in to such a measure, the Government expresses its willingness to set aside Government time for a debate in both Houses on the basis of a motion on the Government’s recommended approach on the opt-in.From the looks of it, this is not a strong enough safeguard. The big question is who decides what counts as "particularly strong" interest. We remain convinced that in order to avoid situations where future EU proposals in Justice and Home Affairs are debated at the convenience of the Government (which is the case at the moment), all opt ins should be subject to Parliamentary approval (there are pragmatic ways to deal with minor proposals, without throwing the baby out with the bathwater).
On the crucial 2014 choice, the Government clearly commits to putting this to a vote in both Houses. This is encouraging, though again, they should put that into writing in the EU Bill, so that it would be beyond doubt. A political agreement/commitment can be altered, which we all know too well when it comes to EU matters. The statement reads:
Parliament should have the right to give its view on a decision of such importance. The Government therefore commits to a vote in both Houses of Parliament before it makes a formal decision on whether it wishes to opt-out. The Government will conduct further consultations on the arrangements for this vote, in particular with the European Scrutiny Committees, and the Commons and Lords Home Affairs and Justice Select Committees and a further announcement will be made in due course.In other words, there's much to play for here. Are MPs paying attention?
2 comments:
These responses from the coalition government confirm all our fears about their reluctance to submit the EU question to any form of democratic oversight and decision.
If their intentions are benign they would have no difficulty in agreeing to the proposals. That would play well with their Eurosceptic members and might allow the Conservative leadership to reclaim some of its lost credibility on the EU issues.
The fact that they are not emphatic suggests they may well opt into the criminal justice issues when the time comes. So the future of our freedom is subject to a chance decision in 2014 over which our elected representatives are to have no say at all; and we, the people, will be wholly excluded.
We all know what the Government elected MP's think of the European Scrutiny Committees' opinion when only 39 of them agreed with Bill Cash's amendments to the European Bill. It is the Party machinery that make these decisions through the whips.
It is British Government's, Brussels bias, civil servants who draft such Parliamentary Bills' and pass them on for approval to weak-minded MP's governed by their Brussels bias Party elite. Who can possibly expect a fair outcome for the British people?
Post a Comment