§ 12. Mr. Gallie
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps he will take to ensure that proposals to have the veto removed from European Union decision making are rejected; and if he will make a statement. 
§ Mr. David Davis
I crave your indulgence for 30 seconds, Madam Speaker. I hear that my hon. Friend has had a happy event in the past day or two and the words, ''We are a grandfather" are probably in order. I offer my best wishes to him, his daughter and his grand-daughter Naomi.
With regard to my hon. Friend's question, the case for extending the use of qualified majority voting has not been made and we shall continue to oppose such proposals at the intergovernmental conference.
§ Mr. Gallie
I thank my hon. Friend for his kind remarks of a personal nature and also for his response to my question, as it was the response for which I had hoped. Does not the Government's approach contrast with the policies offered by the Lib-Lab Opposition? Does not their white-flag policy on the issue pose a great threat to the people of the United Kingdom in the years ahead?
§ Mr. Davis
My hon. Friend is entirely right. The Liberal party is willing to give up our sovereignty in the form of the veto on many matters, including foreign affairs. It is willing to subordinate the Western European Union to the European Union and to do almost anything to advance the cause of federalism. The Labour party, in a rather more concealed way, is aiming in the same direction.
As for qualified majority voting and vetoes, we have heard many arguments about the unanimity requirement holding up Europe, but on Monday this week we witnessed a demonstration of how it works, and works well, when the way in which the European Union should deal with the Helms-Burton proposal came before the Foreign Affairs Council. Denmark had serious constitutional, political and judicial problems with that proposal. Because it was a matter of unanimity, Denmark was not overridden-as it might have been with qualified majority voting-and we found a perfectly good and effective policy which met all its requirements. That happened because Denmark had the veto, and the same should apply to us.
§ Mr. Shore
I welcome the Minister's assurance, but will he go beyond sticking by the veto where it now exists and turn his mind to persuading our European partners that in relation to qualified majority the votes should he re-weighted, so that Britain and other larger and more populous European states have a much larger share of the votes?
§ Mr. Davis
I find myself mildly embarrassed, as I entirely agree with the right hon. Gentleman. A country such as Luxembourg has one vote for 400,000 people while we have one vote per 6 million people. That should be put right, and that is one of our objectives at the next intergovernmental conference.