European treaty referendum question won’t go away
Calls for the referendum on the EU Treaty continued today after the foreign secretary faced the European Scrutiny Select Committee (ESSC) yesterday.
Gordon Brown was asked again during prime minister’s questions by Conservative leader David Cameron if he would be calling a referendum on what he said was a ‘substantially equivalent’ treaty, referring to comments from the ESSC chairman.
“In his manifesto he promised a referendum on the EU constitution. The overwhelming majority of people in this country want a referendum on the European constitution. The European leaders, the European Scrutiny Committee and his own rep on the EU convention all say the new treaty is the same as the constitution. So will he tell us why he won’t grant a referendum on the constitution?” Mr Cameron said in the House of Commons.
“It is different because it is not a constitutional treaty, it is an amending treaty,” Mr Brown told the House.
He pointed to the protocol in the charter of rights, option on justice and home affairs, emergency break in social security and exemptions on security issues, saying the UK had met its red lines, and a referendum was not needed.
He added no European country except the Ireland was having a referendum on the treaty.
However, the Labour chair of the European Scrutiny Committee last night raised concerns over whether the key policy issues in the treaty the government wants excluded, called “red lines”, were being excluded as the prime minister claimed.
Speaking to BBC Two’s Newsnight Michael Connarty said the red lines were being met in foreign affairs, taxation and the Charter of Fundamental Rights, but not in several other areas.
“I think in justice and home affairs, criminal matters, civil matters, immigration, I think they [the red lines] have just been seriously damaged,” said Mr Connarty.
He added: “The prime minister should reject clauses three and four of the new article that’s been added to the protocols.
“It basically says after five years the UK must accept the European Court of Justice and the commission will have the right to decide on matters to do with justice and home affairs; they are ones where at the moment they are not involved in, they are excluded from.
“And after five years that’s a penal regime, and it means that they can say you either take all the amendments we want to put in to these, or we put you outside of the whole arrangement.”
Mr Connarty concluded that he thought the Foreign Secretary should not accept these clauses, which had been added on October 3rd and “should never have been accepted”.
The foreign secretary’s handling of the treaty also came under fire from the Conservatives yesterday.
Shadow Europe minister Mark Francois said yesterday Mr Miliband was “evasive in answering detailed questions” and caused exasperation among the committee members.
“The case for referendum is now becoming unanswerable,” Mr Francois argued.
