European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill

Lord Lisvane Excerpts
Viscount Trenchard Portrait Viscount Trenchard
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

No, I would like to finish so I will not give way to the noble Lord again. It is therefore strange—

Lord Lisvane Portrait Lord Lisvane (CB)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I rise purely in a spirit of helpfulness. Perhaps the noble Viscount could keep in mind the difference between a money Bill and a Bill that requires a money resolution. It is quite a profound difference.

Viscount Trenchard Portrait Viscount Trenchard
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the noble Lord for his helpful advice. Nevertheless, I find it strange that the Speaker made the ruling he did, as the—

--- Later in debate ---
Debate on whether Clause 2 should stand part of the Bill.
Lord Lisvane Portrait Lord Lisvane
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I speak as a member of the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee. The chairman of the committee, the noble Lord, Lord Blencathra, is unable to be here today because he is absent on parliamentary business. No doubt noble Lords have a copy of the 51st report of the Delegated Powers Committee. The argument set out by the committee is brief, concise and telling. I will not attempt to summarise it or indeed to read out the report, because paragraph 5 could hardly be summarised more briefly than it has been set out by the committee.

The committee acknowledges in paragraph 4:

“The principal justification for clause 2 of this Bill is that it might be necessary to legislate at speed next week”—


in other words, this week—

“to change exit day. The affirmative procedure might cause delays, with the risk that exit day in domestic law might not be aligned with exit day agreed under EU law”.

The committee goes on to say that on the other hand, there are powerful and telling arguments in favour of the affirmative procedure. It notes that were Clause 2 to be removed from the Bill, we would simply return to, as it were, the default setting.

Because this will be a matter of business management, the most helpful thing for your Lordships might be to have some indication from the Minister as to whether there is a balance of advantage of using the negative or the affirmative procedure. On that basis, it may be for your Lordships to decide whether Clause 2 remains in the Bill.

Lord Forsyth of Drumlean Portrait Lord Forsyth of Drumlean
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, again, I am disadvantaged as being neither a member of the committee or a lawyer. I am surprised that the noble Lord has not drawn the attention of the House to the fact that, as I understand it, the committee report makes it clear that this House would no longer be able to be consulted on those matters. Is that not correct?

Lord Lisvane Portrait Lord Lisvane
- Hansard - -

It is indeed; the noble Lord is correctly quoting from the final bullet point of paragraph 5. I did not want to delay your Lordships further, but that is a helpful, additional piece of information set out in the report.

Lord Hope of Craighead Portrait Lord Hope of Craighead (CB)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Perhaps the noble Lord would also say a word about the effect of a petition against. The fact that the instrument is passed is not the end of the day, or at least not necessarily so. Could he elaborate a bit on the consequences if someone objects after the event?

Lord Lisvane Portrait Lord Lisvane
- Hansard - -

I should be happy to do so. The Convenor of the Cross Benches, the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hope of Craighead, has helpfully drawn attention to the possible uncertainty that might arise were the negative procedure to be kept in place and were there to be a successful Motion for annulment of the instrument that was made under that provision. I suggest that that is an additional argument for returning to the affirmative procedure.

Lord Goldsmith Portrait Lord Goldsmith
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, this has been a difficult matter to determine, but the priority as I see it remains ensuring that this can be done in time. That is the concern. I do not want to be disagreeable at this point in the debate, but we all know that the Prime Minister knew last December that the deal that she had done would not pass, but we find ourselves at the very last stages having to deal with the possibilities of what happens if she cannot reach an agreement.

The affirmative procedure gives rise to the concern that the matter will have to return, perhaps on Friday: it depends what time the European Council meeting finishes. We have already destroyed the recess for many people, and that would destroy the weekend as well. Although we on these Benches are normally strongly in favour of affirmative resolutions, on this occasion we see the force of what is in the Bill.