Letter to Daily Telegraph published on 10th August 2019 under the title “Recent history shows that royal powers could stop an anti-Brexit bill”.

Beside advising the Queen to withhold assent to a bill which has passed all stages in the Houses of Commons and Lords, as mentioned by Andrew Roberts (Comment, August 8), the Prime Minister can advise the Queen to withhold her consent to a bill proceeding beyond second reading where it touches on any of the 14 royal prerogative powers, which include the making of international treaties and declarations of war.

Such consent has been withheld three times in the United Kingdom during the present Queen’s reign, the most recent being in 1999, on the advice of Tony Blair.

This was in respect of a bill introduced by the late Sir Tam Dalyell, intended to make military action against Iraq contingent on approval by a majority vote in the House of Commons. Second reading was postponed and the bill fell because the Queen’s consent for it to be debated was withheld.

There are, therefore, recent precedents for stopping an anti-Brexit bill in its tracks between September 3 and October 31, so long as the Prime Minister tenders the relevant advice to the Queen.

Presentation to the Parliamentary Manufacturing Industry Group, Houses of Parliament on 25th November 1997.

S F Bush

To see the presentation, please click on New Products.

Article in “The European Journal” Midsummer 1994

Stephen Bush

Do you know that the President of the Board of Trade is due to use his powers under the Electricity Act 1989 so that the electrical voltage supply to British homes is reduced from 240 volts to 230 volts on 1^st January 1995 in order to “harmonise” with the Continent? Do you also know that a proposal to replace the standard British three pin fused and shuttered plug with a non-fused, non-shuttered Euro-plug modelled on the French/German types, is at an advanced stage of discussion? I doubt if many readers will have known this, because confirmation of these impending changes has just been extracted from the Government by means of Questions put by Lord Stoddart in the House of Lords and Austin Mitchell in the House of Commons. “Extract” is the word since although the relevant Government Ministers claimed that the voltage changes are being implemented after “extensive consultation” (Tim Eggar 31^st January, Lord Strathclyde 13^th January), the 20 million British domestic customers of the Electricity supply industry were not included. I only learned of the impending changes during a chance conversation with representatives of the electrical manufacturers’ industry late last year.

So leaving aside for the moment the manner in which important changes to our way of life are brought in under Euro rule, what are the practical implications of these particular changes?

Voltage reduction from 240 to 230 makes a reduction in the power obtained from all heating appliances by eight percent. So what was purchased as a 3 kilowatt room heater, washing machine or dryer, will now be a 2.7 kilowatt unit. Dryer times, the water heating stages of washing machines and oven cooking times will be extended by up to six minutes in every hour. Hot plates on cookers will be noticeably slower to respond. Lord Strathclyde (13^th January) referred to all this as “a few electrical appliances”. During cold snaps when demand is very heavy, the voltage normally sags below the present 240 volts. With a standard of only 230 volts, the effect will be that much more noticeable. In essence all our nation’s electrical heating equipment, domestic and industrial, will have been down-rated by eight percent as the result of the government’s caving in once again to Euro-pressure.

And what is the alleged purpose of this hamonisation? Mr Eggar in a written answer to Austin Mitchell (31^st January): “All EC countries are changing their low voltage supply system to a nominal (sic) voltage of 230/400 to provide voltage harmonisation throughout the EC”; i.e. it is harmonisation for harmonisation’s sake. And what of the costs and benefits? Mr Eggar again: “Estimates put these at £680 million at 1992 prices over a 30 year period, together with an annual increase in distribution losses of £20 million. The benefits are less readily quantified . . .” As with all Euro-initiatives, the costs to Britain are certain: the benefits are, shall we say charitably, problematical.

As for the plugs’ harmonisation project, you may rest assured that the eventual proposal will not impose any significant cost on Germany or France. The present proposal essentially means that the old-fashioned Franco-German two or three round pin, unfused, plug and star wiring system, which Britain abandoned from the 1940s onwards, will be imposed on the rest of Europe. The fact that the modern British shuttered and fused plug ring-main system is probably the best system in the world is irrelevant, because these matters are decided on political, not practical grounds. The EC will never adopt a British system, however good, if it conflicts with a German or French system. Thus the natural and graphic British wiring colour coding, red for live (danger!) black for neutral, green for earth, distinguishable in the dark, was forced to give way to the ambiguous mish-mash we presently have (think of it – brown for danger).

However as a result of our probing, Mr Eggar informs us (26^th January) that the DTI “has commissioned an independent analysis of the likely costs and benefits of adopting a future European plug and socket standard”. This “will be published in the Spring to form the basis for wider consultation on the issue”. So stand by to give Mr Eggar the benefit of the wider consultation he is seeking. Let us make sure it is the British people he consults on an issue affecting every one of us directly.