Press releases
23/02/08
Background briefing: The EU Constitution and the referendum – where are we?
1) The debate in the country and the Constituency Referendum Campaign
2) The split in the Liberal Democrats
3) The parliamentary arithmetic
4) The parliamentary timetable
Introduction
This briefing note looks at the current state of play in the debate about a referendum on the revived EU Constitution. It looks at the parliamentary debates, and also at the debate in the country, and within the political parties.
The Commons will debate the issue of a referendum on 5 March, and the third reading of the bill is expected just before the budget – perhaps on 11 March. If the bill succeeds in clearing the Commons it will then head to the Lords where the parliamentary arithmetic is less favourable for the Government. A close-run vote in the Commons - combined with the widespread perception that the Government has stifled debate in the Commons - could create a difficult situation for the Government in the Lords.
The Government has failed to convince the public that the Lisbon Treaty is different to the rejected EU Constitution. A YouGov poll found that 94% of voters do not believe the Government’s claim that it is different to the Constitution - on which a referendum was promised. The Government’s strategy now relies not on attempting to persuade the public – but simply trying to play down the issue and move on. However, the parliamentary debate is likely to run until June, and the issue will continue to dog the Government.
1) The debate in the country and the Constituency Referendum Campaign
I Want a Referendum is currently running a series of ten referendums in selected parliamentary constituencies across the country. IWR has commissioned Electoral Reform Services (ERS) to run a postal ballot in each constituency. ERS is one of the world's leading independent election scrutineers, and is recognised in UK legislation and by the United Nations.
Two of the MPs whose constituents have been given the chance to vote through IWR’s constituency referendum campaign have come out in support of a referendum.
Today Paul Truswell, Labour MP for the West Yorkshire seat of Pudsey, has declared that he will now rebel against the Government line and back a referendum. He joins another 28 Labour MPs who have already said publicly that they will vote for a referendum. A significant number of other Labour MPs are also thought to support a referendum.
Last week, Somerset Liberal Democrat MP and Shadow Justice Secretary David Heath told his party whips that he will listen to his constituents and will vote for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, even if they threaten to sack him from the front bench.
He said he was prepared to lose his job "if that is the consequence of voting for a referendum on the Treaty. It has not yet been determined. The chief whip knows what my position is. We have been discussing it for some time."
Other MPs whose constituents are being given a vote have reacted strongly to the local referendums.
Europe Minister Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire) has been responding very publicly to the campaign. On his blog he urged voters to "bin the ballot". He has also widely distributed a leaflet across his constituency claiming that it is not a secret ballot and that the Tories will be able to get hold of voters' details. Murphy has now tried to distance himself from the leaflet. Somewhat bizarrely he told the BBC when challenged: "You'd have to ask the Labour party about that".
Eastleigh MP Chris Huhne has also put out a flyer in the constituency calling on voters to "boycott" the referendum, making the curious claim that I Want a Referendum had "refused Eastleigh people a real choice on an EU referendum.”
Aberconwy MP Betty Williams was at the centre of a bizarre controversy before the poll started in her constituency. Chief Whip Geoff Hoon informed IWR that she had been "very poorly" and that it was unfair to hold a referendum in Aberconwy. However Betty Williams responded saying she was "perfectly healthy," so the referendum was put back on. BBC Radio 4's PM reported on the whole incident.
Hammersmith MP Andrew Slaughter has reacted most angrily in public to the referendum campaign. He clashed with IWR Chairman Derek Scott on the Week in Westminster. The heated "debate" was picked up by bloggers like Guido and Jonathan Isaby.
The results of the constituency referendums will be announced on 2 March.
2) The split in the Liberal Democrats
The key to the parliamentary arithmetic on a referendum is the position of the Liberal Democrats – particularly in the Lords. The Lib Dems’ previous support for a referendum on the Constitution was cited by Ministers as a key reason for Tony Blair’s original decision to u-turn and concede a referendum.
The Liberal Democrats' position is now confused. Nick Clegg initially said that the party would vote with the Government against a referendum. Making policy on the hoof, he said on the Today Programme that:
"We would vote against a referendum on the Treaty and vote in accordance with our long-held position that the real referendum which needs to be had is whether we stay in the European Union or not." (22 January)
However, this had not been agreed within the party and caused an angry response internally. Clegg was subsequently forced to back down in the first real challenge to his leadership. Challenged on the issue this week, Shadow Foreign Secretary Ed Davey said that people “will have to wait and see how we vote on the night.” (Hansard, 20 February).
It appears that the Lib Dem leadership has not yet decided whether try to whip MPs to abstain or allow a free vote. However, even if a free vote is not offered it appears that at least 15 Liberal Democrat MPs will vote for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.
Several Front Benchers are campaigning for the party to change position and back a referendum on the Treaty.
Shadow Defence Secretary Nick Harvey said in a letter to a constituent in January that “The similarities between the Reform Treaty and the proposed EU constitution clearly outweigh the differences. Yes I do personally support a referendum." However, he has subsequently gone back and now says he will not rebel.
Lembit Opik (Shadow Housing) has said that: “The question of a referendum on the Treaty itself is a hard question. As you well know, others say that the Treaty is so much like a Constitution that it warrants a referendum on its own. I think the best thing I can do is abstain on the specific vote about a referendum on the Treaty.” (Spectator 19 February)
Sandra Gidley (Shadow Health) also says that she has not made up her mind. (Times, 14 February). She says: “I haven't completely made up my mind yet but I am very exercised by the fact that I stood on an election platform for a referendum. I will probably have a clearer idea by the end of the week but I have still to be convinced that the Lisbon Treaty is substantially different to the constitution.”
Tim Farron (Shadow countryside spokesman) told a constituent in a letter: "I do believe that the Government should be held to account for its failure to uphold the manifesto pledge and I will vote for a referendum".
Colin Breed (Shadow Treasury spokesman) has said "I would support a referendum on the proposed European Treaty."
Richard Younger Ross (Shadow DCMS) was one of the first to come out as pro-referendum and is sharing a platform with Bill Cash at a Bruges group meeting next week. The title of his talk will be "The Lisbon Treaty and why we should have a referendum on it."
Backbench Lib Dem MPs Mike Hancock at John Hemming have also come out in favour of a referendum.
Eight more abstained at the Second Reading: Annette Brooke, Lorely Burt, Alistair Carmichael, Mark Oaten, Paul Rowen, Bob Russell, Sir Robert Smith, John Thurso.
It is unclear what will happen if a referendum amendment is put down, as expected, calling for a two question referendum (i.e. combining the Lib Dem call for a referendum on “in or out” and a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty itself.
3) The parliamentary arithmetic
The split-or-abstaining position of the Liberal Democrats makes the parliamentary arithmetic in the Commons more interesting than it might have been a few months ago.
Virtually all the smaller parties are in favour of a referendum: the SNP, Plaid, the unionist parties, as well as various independent MPs. Indeed the Scottish Parliament and the Northern Ireland Assembly have both passed resolutions calling for a referendum. Westminster SNP Leader Angus Robertson MP said this week that, “The people were promised a referendum on these EU changes by all political parties, and they must not be denied one now by the UK Government. Alex Salmond and I agree that there has to be a full referendum on this EU Treaty.”
If 16 Liberal Democrats vote for a referendum while others abstain, then given the small number of Conservatives who have declared against a referendum, and the SDLP’s 3 MPs who will vote against, there would need to be 68 Labour MPs voting for a referendum to deny the Government a majority. With all Liberal Democrats voting for a referendum there would “only” need to be 45 Labour MPs voting for a referendum.
In the Lords the arithmetic is potentially much closer. If the Liberal Democrats stick with their policy of abstention in the Lords, a large vote for a referendum by crossbenchers could produce a majority for a referendum.
There are 202 Conservative peers, and 215 Labour peers. If the 78 Liberal Democrats were all to abstain, (though some will clearly vote for a referendum) then there would need to be just 13 more of the 224 crossbenchers in favour than against in order to deny the Government a majority. The Government's shabby handling of the debate in the Commons could potentially push the crossbenchers in favour of a referendum.
4) The timetable – and the debate in the Commons
The Government’s strategy has been to limit the discussion as much as possible. While the Government initially promised 20 days debate, this has been reduced to 12 days.
Worse still – unlike in previous debates over Maastricht, the Government has used up all the time which would be available for amendments and detailed scrutiny by holding a series of vapid “themed debates” on Government motions. Only an hour and a half then remains for independent motions. So the total time available for independent scrutiny really amounts to little more than a few hours.
Even Michael White in the Guardian has noted that: “the detailed Commons committee stage of the bill - five of the promised 12 days taken so far - is all but meaningless. Why? Clever Geoff Hoon, Labour chief whip, has persuaded MPs to vote to overrule their own standing orders. Instead of line-by-line debate which explores changes to foreign policy procedures, EU cooperation on crime or energy, at least half of each day is devoted to a "themed" discussion, with debate on specific amendments tacked on later. Does procedure matter? No one would be allowed to change the rules before a football match or criminal trial. Yet younger MPs on both sides barely grasp what powers they have given to Whitehall - let alone to Brussels.” (22 Feb)
This tactic has allowed the Government to avoid all discussion of whole areas of the Constitution. For example, on the first day there was no time left to debate amendments on the asylum and immigration aspects of the bill. Nor will there be any report stage of the bill in the Commons.
There are a few more themed debates left, and the votes on the referendum amendments are expected on Wednesday 5 March. The Third Reading will be buried just ahead of the budget on 11 March.
It is unclear when the bill might appear in the Lords. Two weeks have to pass between first and second reading, but the second reading will probably happen just before the Easter recess (3 – 21 April). Two weeks have to pass between second reading and committee stage and two weeks between committee stage and report stage. There is another recess at Whitsun (22 May -2 June). These factors and the length of the Lords process mean that the key votes in the Lords may not be before June.
Commons
25 February - International Development
26 February - EU Institutions
27 February - Climate Change
3 March - Amendments to Clauses 3 - 7
4 March - Remaining amendments to Clauses 3 - 7
5 March - Referendum amendments (Clause 8)
11 March - Third Reading
12 March - Budget
Lords
Second reading either before or after recess (3 April – 21 April)
Key votes in June?