---

European Union (Amendment) Bill

Of course that adds to the case for a referendum. It is an issue that we debated in Committee last night, and I am pleased to say that the hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Mr. Davey) and I, and Members of other parties, made common cause in saying that the use of such ratchet clauses should be subject to primary legislation, rather than the simple motion to which the Government have so far committed themselves. Let us remind ourselves of the categoric nature of the promises made. The Conservative manifesto was clear. The Labour party manifesto stated:"““We will put it””—" that is, the European constitution—"““to the British people in a referendum and campaign wholeheartedly for a ‘Yes’ vote””." The then Prime Minister, Tony Blair, elaborated, as he often did, to The Sun. He said:"““We don’t know what is going to happen in France, but we will have a referendum on the constitution in any event, and that is a government promise””—" I repeat—““in any event””. Asked what it was that made the European treaty constitutional in nature, the then Foreign Secretary, now the Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor, said at the Dispatch Box on 6 June 2005 that it was the creation of an EU president and an EU Foreign Minister. He said:"““Those points are central to the European constitutional treaty, and of course I see no prospect of their being brought into force, save through the vehicle of a constitutional treaty.””—[Official Report, 6 June 2005; Vol. 434, c. 1001.]" Even the most casual voter, looking to see whether the promises made at election time are fulfilled, would recognise that that combination of statements does not allow for the abandonment of the referendum when a redrafted treaty still contains the essence of its constitutional nature, as defined by the current Lord Chancellor himself.