The working text for the EU treaty was published in English for the first time
at the end of July. We can now see more clearly than ever that this new
treaty is essentially the old EU constitution, rejected by French and Dutch
voters just two years ago, but brought back under another name.
Or rather it is clear only when the deep legal obscurity of the text has been
penetrated. That obscurity is deliberate. As Giuliano Amato, the former
Italian Prime Minister and vice-president of the body that drafted the
original constitution said, the treaty’s draughtsmen “decided that the
document should be unreadable. If it is unreadable, it is not
constitutional, that was the sort of perception.”
However, just about every European leader has been happy to boast about how
much of the old constitution has been revived: 90 per cent, according to the
Irish Prime Minister, 98 per cent according to the Spanish Foreign Minister,
who explained “the wrapping has been changed, but not the content”. Even
Gordon Brown let slip after a meeting with a fellow European prime minister
that they had “discussed the European constitution and how that can move
forward”.
So there can be no pretence that the EU constitution has not been brought
back. Naturally, more and more people are wondering what has happened to the
referendum they were promised on it.
All MPs were elected on manifestos promising the British people the final say
on the constitution in a referendum. Mr Brown has no mandate to sign up to
98 per cent of it and ram it through Parliament without so much as a
by-your-leave from voters. David Cameron pressed Mr Brown on this point in
the last Prime Minister’s Questions. In response Mr Brown produced three
arguments why there was no need for a referendum.
First, he said that all the Government’s negotiating objectives had been
achieved. But the Government did not object to the creation of a new EU
president, the loss of at least 60 of our national vetoes, granting the EU
the power to make treaties, the widening of the EU’s powers elsewhere or a
new ratchet clause that would allow any veto outside defence to be abolished
and the Brussels institutions to strengthen their role without the need for
a new EU treaty.
Even if all the objectives the Government set itself have been met, the bulk
of the constitution has still been brought back. But the negotiating
objectives themselves were seriously inadequate and the Government’s claim
to have achieved them falls apart on examination.
Its boast to have safeguarded our foreign policy turns out to be based on a
clause in the treaty that would not even be legally binding. Its claim that
it has stopped the Charter of Fundamental Rights from changing laws in the
UK “in any way” is shot through with holes. The Swedish Prime Minister told
his parliament that “it should be stressed that the UK was given a
clarification, not an opt-out”.
The safeguard against the new powers over criminal justice that the treaty
gives to the EU is weaker than it looks. EU judges will have the power to
rule on existing and future EU agreements in an area that has been until now
wholly intergovernmental. Indeed, the EU Justice Commissioner said that he
will use these new powers to the full. Over time, we could see our criminal
justice system changed against our wishes.
As for the last of these so-called red lines, on tax, a government spokesman
privately confessed to one BBC reporter that “it was a bit of a con” and
“purely presentational”.
The Government’s claim to have safeguarded our interests is about as credible
as a student who set his own exam paper, marked it himself and then awarded
himself an A-grade.
Mr Brown’s second argument against a referendum is to quote a line in the
treaty agreement that says the “constitutional concept . . . is abandoned”.
But the next line says that everything in the original constitution would be
kept, unless stated otherwise – and according to a study by the think-tank
Open Europe, only 10 out of 250 proposals in the constitution have been
changed. As dozens of senior EU politicians have said, this is the same
content with a different label. The original constitution’s chief author,
Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, explained it succinctly: “Making cosmetic changes
would make the text easier to swallow.”
Mr Brown’s last and weakest argument is to claim that none of this matters
because it is an “old agenda”. But nothing can be more central to today’s
politics than the restoration of trust, badly damaged by ten years of Labour
government. As Gisela Stuart, the Labour MP, said: “It has everything to do
with the new Labour agenda: there was a manifesto commitment to a referendum
on the EU constitution”.
Just before becoming Prime Minister Mr Brown reminded his party that “the
manifesto is what we put to the public. We’ve got to honour that manifesto.
That is an issue of trust for me with the electorate.” Yet the Labour
manifesto he was talking about promised a referendum on the constitution.
Mr Brown talks endlessly of a new era of openness and accountability. He says
he will consult and listen more. Yet he now proposes as his first big
decision as Prime Minister to break a solemn manifesto promise and deny the
British people their say over who governs Britain and how it is governed.
But how can he expect the British people to trust him if he does not trust
them? How can he listen to people if he will not let them speak?
Mr Brown’s convoluted arguments against a referendum do not stack up. By
contrast our case is simple: this is the EU constitution in all but name,
the British people were promised a referendum on it, so let them have that
vote.
The question should be put to the people to preserve at least a glimmer of what we call democracy and to finally let the people of this country know how many lies have been told to convince, with unsurprising failure, a public who has witnessed the lies which took us into political union under the guise of a common market we were told was for trade.
Our whole political landscape has since been based on lies and deceit from those in government to avoid the people being told and having a vote on it.
I have witnessed Boot Boy Euro Police in Brussels, kicking and punching old men and hitting them to the heads with riot sticks for simply protesting to the EU to give them 'democracy', and this is what we have to come to in Britain as it is seen across Europe yet their governments still say NO.
Nothing short of treason and a vile crime to humanity is being committed against the people.
Get a vote for us Mr Hague we implore you before we lose our country !
Edde Allen, Houghton Le Spring, Tyne & Wear
Why should the government hold a referendum when the past 50 years in Britain is comparable to that of a dictatorship? Thatcher's endorsement of enhancing the gap between rich and poor by encouraging the class distinction was not subjected to a referendum. Britain's anti-terrorism laws were passed without consulting the British electorate and the Iraq war was forced unto the British people by the Blair government (in the name of tackling "terrorism").
Of course not having a referendum on a European constitution is wrong. This is something Brown wants to avoid because he knows full well the British people will reject it. They've been taught that British independence and sovereignty is the best thing since sliced bread because being under European rule, and having one common foreign policy, is inconsistent with the policies of the weapons manufacturing industry in Britain. Does Britain wish to submit to democratic rule from Europe, or continue its business relationship with the U.S.?
Jonathan Smith, London, U.K.
Of course there should be a referendum.
But what will happen if Brown refuses to hold one?
Will there be a mass demonstration? Will there be an electoral boycott? Will there be the threat of mass civil disobedience?
All these things would probably be necessary in the face of absolute refusal by Brown.
But who would organise these things? Not the Conservatives who are currently the kiss of death to anything they touch.
I suggest a coordinated campaign organised by the editors of the leading newspapers and television moguls.
Richard TRACEY , DINAN, France
Absolutely! We must have a referendum - that's what a democracy is for isn't it? Let's have our say NOW before it's too late!
Cath Bogan, Manchester, UK
William ,why are you not going around the Country holding
meetings on this extremely important matter ?.
Alan Walton, Leicester, England
We must have a vote on Europe. Why? So that the Tories can attack the EU via the smokescreen of democratic principles. Let's see the Tories offer a referendum on whether we stay in Europe as a manifesto pledge and then I'll listen to people like Hague.
Derek S, Dundee,
The British can't be trusted with a referendum for the same reasons that the party of the living-dead (Tories) can't be elected - an obsession with Europe that clouds their judgement.
What foreign policy is to be safeguarded? The UK doesn't have one. It just rides on the back of the US one. And even if it did it has no clout (neither military of economic) with which to back it up.
If nearly every other EU leader is happy and the British are not then history suggests the Europeans have got ir right (again) and the British - especially the Tories - have got it wrong (again).
eddie reader, birmingham, uk
Brown's actions over the last ten years makes it painfully obvious that advice from anybody will only be taken on board if it coincides,rightly or wrongly, with his view. Selling our gold reserves at rock bottom prices for bank of toyland euros,the pensions swindle and currently the HIP that only benefits the Treasury at the taxpayers expense are classic examples. He is obviously dead set on railroading through the EU Treaty.What I would like to see is a statement by the Tories to the effect that any European quasi constitutional stealth legislation entered into by Brown without a referendum will be repealed by the next Tory administration. If Cameron wants to show clear water between his party and the Brown version of New Labour this issue is a golden opportunity.
Philip, Ipswich,
The Tories signed up to much more binding EU treaties than this one without calling a single referendum. Sheer hypocrisy!
Last time I looked at the map Britain was still part of Europe. It hasn·t drifted off to the Caribbean yet.
ken, bournemouth,
As usual with my Gordon Blair sorry Brown he seems to want to stamp his mark on the country and to hell with what the 55+ million people in this country want.Why should we just sit and let him get away with selling the country to Europe, the only good thing about it is that with us being directly governed by europe we wouldnt need Gordon Brown or his party. As everyone else has been requesting we should have a refferendum on what we want and not what we are told we want.Nobody tells us what to buy at the supermarket or what area you can live in so why should we just sit back and except what effectively will shape what happens in our and our childrens future.It is time to stand up against politicians and tell them what we want.
Simon, Liskeard, UK
And not only a referendum on the constitution (interesting, has the word "con" in it) but also a referendum on membership of the whole thing. The 1973 referendum was on a very different system than the current EU, and could very reasonably be held to be invalid as what we voted for no longer, apparently, exists.
Andrew Fanner, Cowplain, UK
The ambiguous text of the Treaty / Constitution is designed to be all things to all nations; except Britain! (What happened to our rebate?)
Trust is central to this issue, if the British people trust Brown and the EU to do what is best for Britain they will make their feelings known in a vote.
The ONLY reason not to have a vote (which has been promised) is to prevent the British people having their say.
So much for returning trust to politics Mr Brown! You are about to put the final boot into the cadaver of British Democracy that Blair so efficiently defeated.
Peter Beswick, Romsey, Hampshire
I submit that there is a general flaw in your appraisal. Let us assume that what you say is true as to defects in the new European proposals, whether you want to call them a treaty or constitution. Having a referendum wont alter the proposals. Presumably, therefore, you are assuming that ‘the people’ will share your expert knowledge and reject it. Why should they do that? How can you assume that they will agree with your view rather than with that of Gordon Brown? They can’t possibly know what are the relevance of the matters in issue, so it is purely a lottery as to which way they may decide. If, therefore, there is a right decision, they could easily make the wrong decision. If, on the other hand, it is a purely political matter, then the political representatives can reach a more informed and appropriate conclusion than their constituents.
Henry Percy, London, UK
Will Mr Brown cover the same way as Mr Blair?
Wait and see,China is waiting for this result.
Tina, York, Uk
Quote.
"Mr.Brown talks endlessly of a new era of openness and accountability"
In the same spirit then do you think that as "Shadow" Foreign Secretary it was wise of you to describe the French as "wine guzzlers"
Could you tell us what prompted you to ennoble Conrad Black.
And how long now do you thnk we have to save the pound.?
declan forde, Eastwood. Notts., UK.
All those who take an interest in Britains future, not only in Europe but the rest of the world, are aware of the way things are moving, and have been aware for a long time.
What we need is a countrywide demand for a referendum. There are enough people writing in daily papers about the situation.
Stop wasting our time writing this sort of stuff, get your people out organising big meetings. Do something positive then people in their millions will support you. What the people want is leadership. Get to it !
Phil de Buquet, Newport, England
To Lori and any Canadians, Americans or Mexicans readers
You face the same issue in the NA, where your governments want to "pool soverignity" and create a similar union.
If you want to find out more, type "North American Union" into your prefered search engine.
Don't get caught out like us Europeans, once the steam roller gains momentum it will be very difficult to stop!
Dan, Uxbridge,
Perhaps it is the duty of the Tory part to take the government to court for breach of contract. Handled properly, the legal processes will grind the government to dust over the issue of a referendum. It is our right.
steve howe, cardiff, uk
I love the way expats are always the first to tell us how to run the country they have abandoned. And Churchill was more of a European than any of the current crop of Tory politicians. Still, if Europe side-tracks the Tories for another election, we have to be grateful for that.
Chris Barraclough, Maidenhead, England
Can we trust our parliament to reject the EU Treaty/Constitution? If the government allows MPs a free vote they should reject the thing because it reduces their own power.
However, perhaps because so many MPs are spineless and are merely looking for an easy (but well-paid) life more appropriate for their intellects, they would pass the Treaty/Constitution into UK law.
Then the rest of us should ask, 'if the majority of UK laws are now dictated by the antidemocratic Brussels Facists, why do we still need an expensive government, parliament and civil service in Westminster?
Think of the spending reduction and consequent reduction in taxation. Perhaps the constitution ain't so bad after all.
RichardCr, Baden, Switzerland
this is simply dictatorship
Dave Morris, Sunderland, UK
Once again we see the Tories dont want to be part of the EU.The problem they have is they are scared to say so outright so they just continue to try to undermine the institution.Why dont they ask the public one simple question do we want to be members of the EU or not.The answer is they are to scared to as it would upset the City and most of the EU and other Countries who now own most of the UK Companies who employ millions of people.
Withdrawal would create millions of job losses and davaluation of sterling.
Bill Rees, Pieusse, France
Good old Tories: " As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly " Proverbs 26 v 11. The House of Commons is the proper place for complex treaty/constitutional matters to be debated - or do the Tories have so little faith in the Mother of Parliaments ?
David, Ligneyrac, France
We face a similar situation in the Netherlands. The government set several goals to be met at the renegotiation, the most important being a bigger say in European affairs for national parliaments. That was achieved on paper, but at closer examination it quickly becomes clear it's nothing more than hot air. That won't stop the government from denying us a second referendum.
But, in essence, Europe is of vital importance to the Netherlands. In economics and more. So to that extent the government would do well to ignore the people's paranoia and say 'yes' to this treaty regardless.
I must admit I'm not extremely knowledgeable on the current status of Britain's foreign economic ties, but I do believe that if they are anything like ours (the Dutch that is), a referendum on this treaty might tragically backfire.
We may have arrived at a point where harming Europe equals harming our respective nation states.
Erik, The Hague, Netherlands
Over the last 32 years (since the referendum in 1975) the leading British politicians - of all parties - have constantly misled us. We NEVER voted for a European State, but just for a Common Market. It gets more and more disgraceful how year by year we find ourselves governed not by our elected Parliament but more and more by dictat from an unelected body in Brussels. I wish Mr Hague success, but frankly I fear that Gordon Brown will just ride roughshod over protests, and that a further step towards a full European State will result.
H L Foxworthy, FORFAR, Angus,
In nreply to Lori, Toronto, Canada If they had run them well we may have more faith in their judgments, as it is?
syd, Leeds, UK
"Mr.Brown talks endlessly of a new era of openness and accountability."
How about you becoming open and accountable by telling us what prompted you to ennoble Conrad Black.
declan forde, Eastwood. Notts., UK.
Whatever happened to ending the "banging on about Europe" that so so tarred the Conservative party? Or, as soon it is politically opportune, the Conservative talk about nothing else but Europe.
Dave, Manchester, UK
Gavin from NY - I bet if all your Country or States' powers were taken away from them and given to bureaucrats hundreds of miles away and who had no inkling of what went on in your country - then I guess you would change your tune. This is the BIG PICTURE for most Brits, so please refrain from making pointless comments till you know the facts.
Tony, Hartford, Cambridgeshire
It was a Labour prime minister - against Tory opposition, who promised a referendum on EEC membership in the 70s. More recently, it was a Labour prime minister - against Tory opposition, who promised a referendum if membership of the Euro zone should be in Britain's interests.
mkpaul, Milton Keynes,
If William Hague is correct in his assertion that 98% of the original constitution has been preserved in the latest agreement, then surely France and The Netherlands must each have another referendum following their rejection of the constitution two years ago.
In fact they are doing no such thing, and the citizens of neither country are in open revolt at such a blatant negation of democracy.
Which suggests that we do NOT have anything close to a constitution.
arnoldo, Coventry,
To the citizens of the uk do not allow any uk government now or in the future to put you under a EU Government with out a referendum if you do you and future generations will regret it.
Iain Henderson, Mandurah. WA., Australia.
labour is the same under Brown as it was under Blair, they consider the British people to be totally blind to their Old Soviet type administration and polices. We have never been so close to a dictatorship as we are now. We need a referendum not only on Europe but the suitability of these people to govern. i am certain that the only people to vote for new labour are those who love to sponge off society, those on the gravy train of government and those too misguided to realise when somebody is ripping them off + the immigrants that treat the UK as an easy touch. It is time for the idiginous population to revolt and get them out.
Alan, London, england
Parliament governs Great Britain and the Monarchy has sovereignty. We subjects have a vote at election time. Is that clear?
Robert, London, UK
I know we live on an 'island' but last I looked we were closer to Europe than, say, America. Maybe google maps is wrong after all.
Farrukh, Woking, UK
To Lori, and any Canadian, American or Mexican readers...
Same is happening in North America, you now face the same issue!
Google "North American Union" and you will find plenty of sites trying to expose that soverignity of the North American Countries is being secretly negotiated away in the same way as happened in the EU already.
Daniel, Uxbridge,
Well said Mr Hague...but isn't it time that David Cameron started taking some action and rousing the electorate to demand a referendom, instead of pussy footing around?
He would most certainly get my vote if he involved himself with British people's concerns and not those of Africa.
It's high time he came out fighting for the VOTERS...they are the ones that matter.
Susannah, Harrogate Yks, UK
reading this article you would think for a minute (wrongly) that the UK government is democratic. we didn't want an iraq war - but we got one, we didn't want massive immigration - but we got it, we want a vote on the EU - but we wont get that.
jim, perth, uk
Let us assume that we had a referendum, and that that there was a resounding NO. What would the Tories do then? Doubtless they would say that they would "renegotiate" with the EU, who would almost certainly say "no renegotiation".
What then?
I asked Mr Hague this very question when, as Tory leader, he visited Torquay in 2001. Embarrassed, he rapidly closed the meeting. Enough said.
Bob Edwards (UKIP), Crediton, Devon,
When will Mr Hague present to the public a clear statement as to which parts of the treaty the David Cameron Conservative Party will accept, which parts they would change and how, and which parts are so against British interests that it must be rejected in total. The problems that Wlliam Hague and the David Cameron Conservative Party face, and will be exploted by Mr Brown, would first be a debate in the HoC. This would require require them to commit to a clear policy on the EU, could Kenneth Clarke and Wiliam Hague present a united front, I think not. The second would be the question on the referendom paper. This would be formulated by the Prime Minister. What if it was something like 'Should the UK pull out of Europe ' yes or no. Do they think they could stop the break up of the party during long campaign, say three months or more, or from complete disintergration if the vote went against them.
Anthony Jaynes, Alton, UK
Dear Sir, believe me, in the end we are all Europeans. I guess, you could have a more pleasant life (and much less stress), if you spent your energy on making things work, rather than obstrusing them by inducing fear and schizophrenia in the people around you. Being cynical about Europe is sooo cheap, man! Go and get a life! Sincerely
Thorsten Pattberg, Edinburgh,
Unbelievable that Britons are so apathetic as to give up sovereignty to the European Union without even demanding to vote on the matter.
Just like the fading days of Rome, when the masses were fed gladitorial combat to distract them from reality, and votes for the senate were corruptly bartered and sold.
Apparently it is true that great civilizations are not conquered from without, but rather rot from within. So sad.
Lori, Toronto, Canada
Yawn. "Eight days to save the pound". The Euro and EU Constitution are minor issues compared to running the country well .. hospitals, schools, the economy. Why not concentrate on the big picture rather than crying wolf (again)?
Gavin, New York, NY
Mr Hague
You are so right. Whatever the state of our country we should be "allowed" to vote on such a basic matter which will affect our lives and our childrens' lives. All parties agreed this. This is just ridiculous spin. Brown is no better than Blair But he is better than Cameron. Us "given up" conservatives need you back.
Gordon ewan, Woking, UK
Blair agreed to the constitution because he expects to be the first 21/2 year serving president of the federal state of europe which is what the constitution creates. In the usual double speak of the eu, giving power back to the nations means we are taking all the powers we want, and letting the nations decide on irrelevant things, in much the same way that the county councils work in the UK, and let's face it we won't need local government when westminster takes over their role, so effectively all the power will be centralised in brussell s and only a handful of self serving politicians, like Blair will have had any say, and will have decided on what they want for personal gain.
Barry Davies, Stafford, UK
I am against Britain signing up to the EU constitution and will be joining the marches in the Autumn for a referendum.
The UK electorate should have a vote on this issue. I have not seen or heard a convincing arguement for the people not having a vote.
The longer Mr Brown delays on establishing that a referendum should be held, the more of a fool he will look when he finally will have to give in.
Daniel, Uxbridge,
There is of course a petition on the 10 downing street website;
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/EU-treaty-NON/
Robert McGuiness, London, England
Everyone who thinks we should have a referendum on the EU treaty/constitution should join the Pro Referendum Alliance.
WWW.PRA.UK.COM
Bertie Poole, Lound, Suffolk
Good. It's about time the Conservatives woke up and started behaving like the Opposition.
In this case Hague is 100% correct to demand that Brown hold the referendum pledged in the manifesto.
Don't hold your breath tho', I'll be surprised if he does
Stan(expat), USA,
It is nmow quite obvious that so long as we- Britain- is part of the EU, those with the malign intent to achieve 'ever closer union' by fair means or foul will move forward. There will be a continuance of underhand tactics to destroy our national sovereignty which our political elite will pretend to fight off but gradually surrender to.
We thought we could be part of a Common Market and keep our national sovereignty. It appears this is not possible. UKIP does seem to be more with it than even the staunchest euro-sceptic part of the Conservative Party.
Dr J Findlater, Carnforth,
If the conservative government under Heath had not lied to the British public in the first place we would not be in this mess.
Steve Byrne, Christchurch, UK
We should and must have a referendum on this issue. The E.U. is too powerful and we are falling into a trap that we may never be able to get out of. Successive governments in this country have used the referendum to swing elections and it is about time they showed their mettle and came down on the side of the electorate who want a say in how we are to be governed.
G.A.GILMARTIN, Bristol, England
The Conservatives have a problem here. Is this really what Mr Cameron thinks? If so, why is he not writing about it too, or is it not really important enough? Has Mr Cameron promised that if elected to PM, the Conservatives would hold a referendum within 6 months of coming to office? Has such a proposal been discussed in the shadow cabinet? Unfortunately, Mr Cameron has "form" here. He promised the Conservatives would leave the EPP within a certain time frame, then reneged.
Peter, London,
Excellent article. As has long been recognised Gordon Brown is a centralist who firmly belives that he knows what is best for everybody. The electorate should just shut up, do as they are told and vote him in every 4 years or so. He is most definitley NOT a politician who belives in 'inclusive Government'.
If the Conservatives want to win the next election they should just focus on this one issue - a referendum. Brown is between a rock and a hard place. He doesn't want one becuase he knows he'll lose. For some reason he obviously believes in this expanded EU - maybe it appeals to the centrailst in him.
The Conservative strategy should be ' you promised a referendum now meet your promise'. Labour will try to exploit the EU pro/sceptic split. But the response is 'it is not about if we do or don't agree with the EU it is about letting the British people decide on who is going to be running Britian. We are happy to do that why aren't Labour??' This is Brown's achilles heel.
John, Reading, UK
Well said, Mr Hague. Churchill's position did not help him with the political establishment of the 1930s, but he understood the threat to the country he loved, and cared enough to carry on resisting and insisting. Keep fighting the good, noble fight.
Nicholas Keen (expat), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
One uphill battle that Tories have before them is that for many Britons, the shape of the emergence of the EU is something they are already very familiar with.
Anyone who belongs to a trade union, Labour led local council or any similar body is very used to the idea that although votes are nominally taken, the reality is that democracy is merely advisory, and the real decisions are taken by an elite who dominate every meeting and pack every vote.
They are even familiar with the EU's three-step program for forcing through programs, the old "no such proposal - yes but it won't affect you - far too late to complain now".
Most working Britons have been led like this all their lives. The EU is a change in scale, not in structure. Democracy has not been abolished so much as radically redefined to mean granting assent to what has already been decided. Some animals really are more equal than others.
jon livesey, Sunnyvale, CA/US
Brown, the man who stole our pensions is now stealing our country. We are out voted by foreigners at home, and over ruled by foreigners abroad.
bifocal, oldham,