My Lords, the noble Baroness repeats phrase that the Prime Minister used last week, of looking for a,
“legally binding unilateral exit clause”.—[
I saw in a brief this morning an alternative phrase—it seemed nonsensical—which is “a joint interpretative document”. Since I understand that any legally binding agreement has to be legally binding on both sides, a unilateral clause—which is not, therefore, legally binding on both sides—seems incompatible with something that is legally binding. Can the noble Baroness explain this paradox?