Europe Minister's incredible non-evidence

The uncorrected version of the Europe Minister's evidence last week to the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee may be read from this link. I will for now merely quote the closing exchanges:

Q98 Mr Heathcoat-Amory: Are we not now paying the price for this incredibly compressed negotiation? You had these focal points, these Sherpas, there since January, they were shown no text, there was no negotiation, and the former Foreign Secretary said there were no discussions. If there had been a transparent process which included this Parliament we would not be in this muddle whereby there is an apparent obligation for us to contribute actively to the good functioning of the Union. If that is interpreted by a future European Court it may find this Parliament or a future Parliament in breach of Treaty law if it became obstructive. This would not have happened if you had just taken it at a slower pace and brought everyone in alongside with you to join in the negotiations. My question to you is just supposing we do not get this change and the word "shall" endures as a potential obligation on this Parliament, can that be amended when Parliament - this Parliament - discusses the Treaty and in any ratification process? If your answer to that is "no" then we are powerless from now on.

Mr Murphy: Thank you, Mr Heathcoat-Amory. With your permission, Chairman.

Q99 Chairman: I am conscious of your time. We did say we would let you go at 3.30.

Mr Murphy: We are confident that this will change. Council Legal Services have been very clear that it is not reflected in other texts, it was not part of the Mandate, and we are pretty straightforward that this should change in the way that I have alluded to your Chairman.

Q100 Mr Heathcoat-Amory: We have a pious hope but no powers.