---

Business of the House (Lisbon Treaty)

It is a pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Hertsmere (Mr. Clappison), who always brings balance and good sense to these debates. The treaty transfers crucial powers from this Parliament to the European Union. Although amendment (f) is imperfect, it is supremely superior to the Government motion. If we compare that motion with the amendment tabled by my right hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr. Cameron), we see a number of problems with the Government’s proposal. For instance, the Government seek to combine on the first day of debate—tomorrow—the issues of migration and asylum, and crime and justice. My hon. Friend the Member for Hertsmere has just spoken about that eloquently, so I shall not repeat what he said. I merely point out that he informed the House that that impossible task insults our very democracy. No specific allotted time is given to debate matters of important national concern, such as the transfer of powers on the common fisheries policy. In respect of that matter, article 3 of the consolidated version of the treaty on the functioning of the European Union states:"““The Union shall…have exclusive competence””." Fishing is an important issue, and we should be given an allotted day to debate it. The common fisheries policy has virtually destroyed our fishing industry. Under CFP rules fish conservation has been decimated, and more fish are thrown back dead or landed illegally than are landed legitimately. Britain provides three quarters of the fish stocks and two thirds of the waters but gets only one eighth of the fish by value. We should programme business to debate that matter on a specific day. The hon. Member for Crewe and Nantwich (Mrs. Dunwoody) talked about the importance of debating transport—rail, air travel and space policy—and that should be given a specific dedicated debate. Employment and industrial relations issues should also be given specific allotted time, as should the charter of fundamental rights. As I have said, the Opposition amendment is far from ideal, but it is designed to recommend itself to the Government. I hope that they will examine it, accept the good sense that it contains and go through the Lobby with us to support it tonight. They should do so because it offers six additional days’ debate on particularly important areas. It offers this House the opportunity to debate, in specifically allotted time, asylum and immigration separately from justice and crime matters. Given the importance that asylum and migration have for our constituents, we should examine them specifically. Those things put enormous pressure on our public services, infrastructure and housing, and deserve to be examined specifically on a separate allotted day. The amendment also offers a specific allotted day to discuss the economy, social security and public services, which are important matters, and another to discuss foreign policy. Given the changes that this constitution— that is what it is—forces on this country, and particularly the impact that an EU Foreign Minister will have on our foreign policy, we need a specific allotted day to debate that issue. The amendment also offers a specific day to discuss the new EU President and the EU’s legal personality, and another to examine the structures of the European Union and the distribution of competences between the EU and member states. In particular, it offers a specific allotted day to debate the provisions concerning national Parliaments. That brings me to the subject of the referendum. My constituents, like every other Member’s constituents, were promised a referendum on the constitution by the three main parties. This is the constitution, and we deserve and we need a referendum on it. It is a matter of trust. The Labour party will have to answer to those constituents when it presents its manifesto at the next election for the lies that it told in its manifesto in the last election.