Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Earl of Liverpool (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 1 April 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill and Debate on select committee report on European Union (Amendment) Bill.


European Union (Amendment) Bill

My Lords, some of my remarks will have echoes of contributions made earlier by, among others, my noble friends Lord Howell, Lord Forsyth and Lord Blackwell, but I shall try to get there by a slightly different route. Recently, a booklet entitled, The Work of the House of Lords, helpfully was circulated to noble Lords by the noble Baroness the Lord President. It includes an important chapter, entitled, ““Holding government to account””, which forms a vital part of our unwritten constitution and, I believe, is a timely reminder to us all. The simple fact is—it has been said repeatedly today—that at the last election all three parties clearly stated that they would hold a referendum on the EU constitution. There is no credible argument for saying that the treaty of Lisbon is somehow not the constitution. That myth has been exploded by, among others, Open Europe. It is an independent organisation, which has done a great service by printing side by side the treaty and the constitution. With one or two minor exceptions they are the same. The author of the constitution, Giscard d’Estaing, has already been extensively quoted in this debate. I thought that I had unearthed a new quote, but, unfortunately, my noble friend Lord Ferrers shot my fox. But it is a good one and so I shall repeat it. He said: "““Public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we do not dare to present to them directly””." He went on to say: "““All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way””." Those words could easily have been lifted straight from the pages of George Orwell’s Animal Farm, and it is worth reminding ourselves that George Orwell was the pen name of Eric Arthur Blair. Perhaps that should have set some alarm bells ringing. I should like also to quote the Minister for business and enterprise, the noble Lord, Lord Jones of Birmingham, who said, "““This is a con to call this a treaty—it’s not. It is exactly the same—it’s a Constitution””." I am sorry that the noble Lord is not in his place because I was hoping to ask him whether he stands by his words, and if so, whether he will vote for a referendum if and when the opportunity arises. The Government say that they have secured their red lines, but sadly I believe that that is delusional. We all know that sooner or later the pressure will become intolerable and they will be inexorably eroded and eventually revoked. In this regard I pray in aid the forfeit of our rebate last year in return for, as far as I can see, precisely nothing. The result of that, as disclosed by the Government in footnotes to recent Budget documents, is that the net cost of EU membership, which was £3.3 billion in 2006-07, will rise to £4.1 billion in 2008 and £6.1 billion in 2010. In other words, it will practically double over three years. I am afraid that it gets worse. In Article 3.4 of the treaty the following words are to be found: "““The Union shall establish an economic and monetary union whose currency is the euro””." Perhaps this is an early example of the ratchet or passerelle because these words were not in the original proposed constitution. Those 14 words are, I believe, of crucial importance. If this treaty is passed unamended, we the British public will yet again be denied a referendum as and when the euro is foisted upon us because we will be told that it was all agreed in this treaty. A number of noble Lords have already referred to the ratchet provision in the treaty which guarantees that power will be steadily transferred to Brussels, and it is worth remembering that ratchets have no reverse gear. I am very sorry to say that our politicians are not held in high esteem at the present time. Part of the reason for that is that there is a perceived lack of trust. If ever your Lordships’ House had an important job to do, I believe it is during the passage of this Bill. The future of your Lordships’ House is uncertain as we await a further White Paper later this year, but if anything I believe that this should increase our resolve to hold the Government to account and give the people of our country the referendum they were promised in the manifesto and by the last Prime Minister, Mr Tony Blair. The Eurocrats should have nothing to fear because they have powerful advocates. I listened to the noble Lord, Lord Kinnock, who certainly had the wind in his sails and was very persuasive. They have powerful advocates in Parliament and elsewhere, and I believe that the British people would be interested to hear those arguments as they seek to reach a decision. The restoration of political integrity is a prize we should strive for. I should have thought all sides of the argument would agree with that.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
700 c987-9 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Children Disclosure of information Accountability Crime prevention Administration of justice Asylum Common fisheries policy Agriculture Climate change Constitutions Borders Employment Human rights Immigration Environment protection EU law Energy International assistance European Union European Parliament European communities EU common foreign and security policy EU institutions France European Court of Human Rights Police Poverty Referendums Parliamentary scrutiny Mental health Terrorism Sovereignty Treaties Security Trade Reform UK membership of EU NATO Common agricultural policy European Court of Justice Council of Ministers European Council EU defence policy UN Security Council Qualified majority voting Treaty of Lisbon Charter of Fundamental Rights (EU) EU presidency
Legislation
European Union (Amendment) Bill 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk