[toronto353]

(Original post by eff01)
Urgent question to the Foreign Secretary, regarding the rejection of Georgia's European Union bid

Mr Speaker, with permission I would like to ask the Foreign Secretary the following questions.
A) Before voting in favour of Georgia's accession into the EU at the MUN, did he have any discussions regarding the matter with the government?
B) After supporting Georgia's accession into to the EU, why did he vote against it at the MHoC?

These Mr Speaker, are two pivotal questions that the Foreign Secretary needs to answer.

Mr Speaker, with regards to question A, conversations that I do or don't hold with the Government are private and therefore I shall not answer that question. With regards to question B, the concerns raised were enough to make my vote a 'no' vote. Prior to this debate, I supported Georgia's bid for the sake of bringing the treaty to the House and giving them a say on the matter. During the debate, the various issues raised were enough to change my vote.

[Morgsie]

On the issue of the rejected Accession Treaty, I apologise for not linking the EEAS pages at the start of the debate

[toronto353]

(Original post by Morgsie)
On the issue of the rejected Accession Treaty, I apologise for not linking the EEAS pages at the start of the debate

It's not your fault Morgsie. You still gave us loads of interesting articles/ websites to read during the debate.

[Morgsie]

(Original post by toronto353)
It's not your fault Morgsie. You still gave us loads of interesting articles/ websites to read during the debate.

I should have done it at the start, If I did then the tone of the debate could have been different .

[eff01]

(Original post by toronto353)
Mr Speaker, with regards to question A, conversations that I do or don't hold with the Government are private and therefore I shall not answer that question. With regards to question B, the concerns raised were enough to make my vote a 'no' vote. Prior to this debate, I supported Georgia's bid for the sake of bringing the treaty to the House and giving them a say on the matter. During the debate, the various issues raised were enough to change my vote.

Mr Speaker, the fact that the Right Honourable Gentleman can not answer that question categorically shows that the Foreign Secretary had no discussion with the government regarding Georgia's accession. If that is the case, Mr Speaker, may I ask the Foreign Secretary why he stated in the MUN that

"The MHoC backs this Ascension treaty and will be proud to welcome Georgia as the newest member of the EU."

..which is an extremely powerful endorsement, if he had no discussion with the government regarding the matter?

[eff01]

(Original post by Morgsie)
On the issue of the rejected Accession Treaty, I apologise for not linking the EEAS pages at the start of the debate

Mr Speaker, the Honourable Gentlemen has nothing to apologise for, it is the Foreign Secretary who has serious questions to answer.

[toronto353]

(Original post by eff01)
Mr Speaker, the fact that the Right Honourable Gentleman can not answer that question categorically shows that the Foreign Secretary had no discussion with the government regarding Georgia's accession. If that is the case, Mr Speaker, may I ask the Foreign Secretary why he stated in the MUN that

"The MHoC backs this Ascension treaty and will be proud to welcome Georgia as the newest member of the EU."

..which is an extremely powerful endorsement, if he had no discussion with the government regarding the matter?

Mr Speaker, once again my counterpart is twisting words. I didn't say that I couldn't answer the question, I said that I wouldn't be doing so because such conversations are private.

With regards to the above statement, yes I did say that, but perhaps I should have added 'if they are admitted to the EU Bloc as a member state' at the end of the sentence.

I have already explained that I backed said treaty to get it to the House so that they could have a say on the matter.

Mr Speaker, I do think that the Honourable gentleman perhaps should be replaced for this debate as he has a vested interest being the representative for Georgia and this may be clouding his judgement on this matter.

[eff01]

(Original post by toronto353)
Mr Speaker, once again my counterpart is twisting words. I didn't say that I couldn't answer the question, I said that I wouldn't be doing so because such conversations are private.

With regards to the above statement, yes I did say that, but perhaps I should have added 'if they are admitted to the EU Bloc as a member state' at the end of the sentence.

I have already explained that I backed said treaty to get it to the House so that they could have a say on the matter.

Mr Speaker, I do think that the Honourable gentleman perhaps should be replaced for this debate as he has a vested interest being the representative for Georgia and this may be clouding his judgement on this matter.

Mr Speaker, I am not twisting the words of the Rt Honourable Gentleman. I have asked the Foreign Secretary a question and he has failed to answer it. I ask the Foreign Secretary once again, did he have discussions with the government prior to supporting Georgia's accession bid? I am not asking the Foreign Secretary to delve into the details of his discussions. A simple yes/no will do.

Mr Speaker, this is not about vested interests, this is about a Foreign Secretary who has given a ringing endorsement to a county's membership bid at the MUN, but when it has come to the vote in this house, he and his government have gone against that endorsement. Once again the Foreign Secretary is saying one thing at the MUN and his government are saying something completely different at the MHoC.

[toronto353]

(Original post by eff01)
Mr Speaker, I am not twisting the words of the Rt Honourable Gentleman. I have asked the Foreign Secretary a question and he has failed to answer it. I ask the Foreign Secretary once again, did he have discussions with the government prior to supporting Georgia's accession bid? I am not asking the Foreign Secretary to delve into the details of his discussions. A simple yes/no will do.

Mr Speaker, this is not about vested interests, this is about a Foreign Secretary who has given a ringing endorsement to a county's membership bid at the MUN, but when it has come to the vote in this house, he and his government have gone against that endorsement. Once again the Foreign Secretary is saying one thing at the MUN and his government are saying something completely different at the MHoC.

Mr Speaker, I will not answer that question for the reasons stated above. I don't ask what discussions Labour has so there should be respect for privacy.

Mr Speaker, this is clearly about vested interests in the MUN from the Honourable Gentleman. I suggest that if the Honourable Gentleman can not separate his MUN role from his MHoC role, then he should step down as Shadow Foreign Secretary and let someone who can make that distinction take on his portfolio.

[eff01]

(Original post by toronto353)
Mr Speaker, I will not answer that question for the reasons stated above. I don't ask what discussions Labour has so there should be respect for privacy.

Mr Speaker, this is clearly about vested interests in the MUN from the Honourable Gentleman. I suggest that if the Honourable Gentleman can not separate his MUN role from his MHoC role, then he should step down as Shadow Foreign Secretary and let someone who can make that distinction take on his portfolio.

Mr Speaker, May I remind the Rt Honourable Gentleman that HE is in government. If he wants to put Labour in power then I suggest he calls an election. I am not asking him to give the house details of his conversation a simple yes or no will do.

Did he have a conversation with the government before giving a ringing endorsement to Georgia's EU bid. Yes or No? No details of what was said in those discussions, just a simple, Yes or No?

[toronto353]

(Original post by eff01)
Mr Speaker, May I remind the Rt Honourable Gentleman that HE is in government. If he wants to put Labour in power then I suggest he calls an election. I am not asking him to give the house details of his conversation a simple yes or no will do.

Did he have a conversation with the government before giving a ringing endorsement to Georgia's EU bid. Yes or No? No details of what was said in those discussions, just a simple, Yes or No?

Mr Speaker, I never mentioned a Labour Government so the Honourable member is twisting my words again.

I won't be answering the question as it is a matter of privacy.

[eff01]

(Original post by toronto353)
Mr Speaker, I never mentioned a Labour Government so the Honourable member is twisting my words again.

I won't be answering the question as it is a matter of privacy.

My Speaker, from that answer I can only conclude that the Foreign Secretary had no conversations with the government before giving a ringing endorsement to the accession of Georgia into the European Union, which members of his government voted unanimously against.

I question the judgement of the Foreign Secretary, Mr Speaker, who is willing to soo powerfully endorse a country's EU membership, without even knowing what his government thinks. Mr Speaker, you would have have thought that any Foreign Secretary before giving such a powerful endorsement would have consulted the cabinet first.

Mr Speaker, the Foreign Secretary further states that issues raised in the discussion 'swayed' the Foreign Secretary's decision in voting, but Mr Speaker, wasn't the Foreign Secretary aware of these issues before? Any Foreign Secretary before endorsing a country's EU membership should at least have the knowledge of all the issues that the country currently faces.

Mr Speaker, we have a Foreign Secretary here who has endorsed a country's EU membership without consulting the cabinet, we have a government here unaware of the Foreign Secretary actions and we have a Foreign Secretary who was unaware of the issues that the candidate state faced before giving such a powerful endorsement.

Mr Speaker, this incident raises serious questions about the Foreign Secretary's judgment and even bigger questions about the state of the coalition.

[toronto353]

(Original post by eff01)
My Speaker, from that answer I can only conclude that the Foreign Secretary had no conversations with the government before giving a ringing endorsement to the accession of Georgia into the European Union, which members of his government voted unanimously against.

I question the judgement of the Foreign Secretary, Mr Speaker, who is willing to soo powerfully endorse a country's EU membership, without even knowing what his government thinks. Mr Speaker, you would have have thought that any Foreign Secretary before giving such a powerful endorsement would have consulted the cabinet first.

Mr Speaker, the Foreign Secretary further states that issues raised in the discussion 'swayed' the Foreign Secretary's decision in voting, but Mr Speaker, wasn't the Foreign Secretary aware of these issues before? Any Foreign Secretary before endorsing a country's EU membership should at least have the knowledge of all the issues that the country currently faces.

Mr Speaker, we have a Foreign Secretary here who has endorsed a country's EU membership without consulting the cabinet, we have a government here unaware of the Foreign Secretary actions and we have a Foreign Secretary who was unaware of the issues that the candidate state faced before giving such a powerful endorsement.

Mr Speaker, this incident raises serious questions about the Foreign Secretary's judgment and even bigger questions about the state of the coalition.

Mr Speaker, to dignify any of this with a proper answer would be improper of me. I shall let the Shadow Foreign Secretary hold his various conspiracy theories as there's no point in me trying to disprove them because he will simply claim his version of events to be true.

[eff01]

Mr Speaker,

May I ask the Foreign Secretary if he has issued a statement to the MUN, informing delegates that his government has passed the 'Diplomatic Immunity' bill?

Mr Speaker, If he hasn't, may I urge the Rt Honourable Gentleman to do so forthwith and explain to the delegates at the MUN in detail the contents of this bill.

[toronto353]

(Original post by eff01)
Mr Speaker,

May I ask the Foreign Secretary if he has issued a statement to the MUN, informing delegates that his government has passed the 'Diplomatic Immunity' bill?

Mr Speaker, If he hasn't, may I urge the Rt Honourable Gentleman to do so forthwith and explain to the delegates at the MUN in detail the contents of this bill.

Mr Speaker, I have not issued a statement and have no plans to do so at the current time. Since the MUN has no Attorney General at the current time who can give a fair and balanced judgement, I see no reason to make a statement.

[eff01]

(Original post by toronto353)
Mr Speaker, I have not issued a statement and have no plans to do so at the current time. Since the MUN has no Attorney General at the current time who can give a fair and balanced judgement, I see no reason to make a statement.

Mr Speaker,

That answer will not simply do. The Foreign Secretary and his government have made a significant change to the Vienna Convention. It has grave consequences on the status of diplomats in the United Kingdom, the least he can do is inform the MUN of this change...

[toronto353]

(Original post by eff01)
Mr Speaker,

That answer will not simply do. The Foreign Secretary and his government have made a significant change to the Vienna Convention. It has grave consequences on the status of diplomats in the United Kingdom, the least he can do is inform the MUN of this change...

Mr Speaker,
The MUN is aware of the change and I am sure that the Attorney General will deliver a statement once elected. I will not be making a statement at this current time.

[eff01]

(Original post by toronto353)
Mr Speaker,
The MUN is aware of the change and I am sure that the Attorney General will deliver a statement once elected. I will not be making a statement at this current time.

Mr Speaker,
May I ask the Foreign Secretary that in what way is the MUN aware of this change? What steps has he taken to inform the MUN delegation of this significant change?

[toronto353]

(Original post by eff01)
Mr Speaker,
May I ask the Foreign Secretary that in what way is the MUN aware of this change? What steps has he taken to inform the MUN delegation of this significant change?

Mr Speaker,
This issue has been raised in the Attorney General election. I have taken no steps at this present time to inform the MUN delegation of this Bill though will review that situation upon the election of a new Attorney General.

[thunder_chunky]

(Original post by toronto353)
Mr Speaker,
The MUN is aware of the change and I am sure that the Attorney General will deliver a statement once elected. I will not be making a statement at this current time.

The issue has been raised in an unofficial capacity. It would probably be good and proper to make an official statement. Though if you are just waiting until a new AG is elected then fair enough.