Part of the debate – in the House of Commons at 11:24 pm on 24 July 1990.
I shall concentrate on the procedural matters that face the House, rather than on any of the merits of the new institution unveiled before our eyes.
It is necessary to consider the procedural matters, because, as the Minister said, the Select Committee on European Legislation has recommended a document produced by the Commission—a decision, 5962/90—for debate in the House. That document contains all the articles of the proposed bank.
I must correct my hon. Friend the Member for Cynon Valley (Mrs. Clwyd) because, on 27 June, we recommended that that document should be debated at an early date. Unfortunately, that has not happened, partly due to the dates of sitting in the House and the fact that Her Majesty's Government are also a party to the treaty as the United Kingdom, as distinct from being a member of the European Community, which is also a party to the treaty. That means that the Government must bring the statutory instruments before us for ratification this evening. Without that, participation in the venture will not be possible.
I will not venture too far into the reasons why we have got the orders before the debate, but we understand that, at this time of year with the long recess before us, difficulties arise. The report of the Select Committee on Statutory Instruments says that this is not a new situation. It states:
There is no technical reason for the House not to approve the draft".
It said that there had been similar circumstances early in the year,
to which attention was drawn in the Select Committee's Sixth Report of this session. The House should merely be aware that it is acting, as before, on a ministerial undertaking.