The process of ratification of the Lisbon treaty will start this week in the House of Commons. I'm against the treaty because it involves an important constitutional transfer of powers from the European nations to the European institutions, from national democracy to supra-national bureaucracy. I'm in favour of a referendum, not only because it was promised by Labour, Tories and Liberal Democrats at the last general election, but also because it would be the best way to ratify - or reject - a big constitutional change. The people should be consulted when their powers of self-government are being given away.
I was struck yesterday by an observation of the Foreign Secretary, David Miliband. He said: “The reform treaty gives Britain a bigger voice in Europe.” That seems to me to be the opposite of the truth. The reform or Lisbon treaty gives Europe a much bigger voice in Britain. It follows the original constitutional treaty in giving the European institutions that are not democratically accountable important additional powers, while failing to repatriate any powers to the individual European nations.
The original constitutional convention was supposed to reduce the democratic deficit of Europe. The Lisbon treaty has done the opposite, taking powers away from the nations and their electorate. The treaty is a defeat for the idea of a liberal democratic Europe; it is surprising that British Liberal Democrats are among its keenest supporters.
The Government's handling of the referendum issue has been shameful, because that, too, has been anti-democratic. The advantage of a referendum process is that it imposes a regard for public opinion on European politicians. If they want to win the referendums, they have to negotiate a popular and democratic constitution. In recent British history devolution has been successfully negotiated for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. In each case the promise of a referendum helped to shape the new constitution. In each case, the new constitution was duly ratified by the referendum.
In the case of the European negotiations the original constitution, which led to the Lisbon treaty, was hijacked by Brussels federalists - contrary to the wishes of the people of Britain, France and the Netherlands. Having hijacked the negotiation, the federalists then found that their idea of a supra-European constitution was deeply unpopular. They could not face any more referendums in Europe because they would lose them. In particular, they could not face a British referendum. The British voters do not want to hand over more powers to the European federalist bureaucracy; they want to get some of them back.
The negotiations for the Lisbon treaty were, therefore, designed from the beginning to get round the need for referendums, except in Ireland, where the Irish constitution requires one. Naturally, this underhand process was designed to avoid the British having a referendum. The Labour Government was a co-conspirator in avoiding the need to fulfil what had become an awkward election pledge. The plot certainly involved Tony Blair, whose last public decision was to agree to the new treaty. He was not acting in order to fulfil his election commitment but in order to evade it. After some initial show of reluctance Gordon Brown accepted this deceitful subterfuge. The British people know they are being manipulated; they resent it.
The ratification of a treaty is a relatively difficult parliamentary process; any treaty will have been negotiated in detail by the Government. The language of a treaty cannot be amended like that of an ordinary Bill. Parliament has to say “yes” or “no” to the treaty as a whole. However, Parliament could impose conditions that might affect or defer the operation of a treaty, or require a referendum as a condition of the ratification process.
Such amendments are likely to be argued in the debate on the Lisbon treaty. One reasonable condition would be to defer ratification until the voters have had an opportunity to decide at a general election. If the Labour party could win an election with ratification of the Lisbon treaty as a manifesto commitment, that would satisfy the requirements of democracy. Of course, Labour might lose, but that would be democratic too.
A referendum would be easier and more straightforward than a general election. It is, after all, something that all three large parties promised at the past general election. The Government cannot honourably avoid it. House of Commons select committees with Labour majorities have found that the Lisbon treaty, on which a referendum is being refused, is really the same as the original constitutional treaty on which a referendum was promised. At present the Conservatives are the only party intending to honour their manifesto commitment.
I do not know what the longer- term impact of ratifying without the promised referendum would be. It would certainly embitter politics. There are many Eurosceptics who feel very angry, who feel betrayed. Voters would become more cynical about politicians, and might regard them all as untrustworthy. The young Eurosceptics are as angry as the older.
In England there is a rising tide of nationalism responding in part to the success of the Scottish nationalists; Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have had their devolutions, in each case ratified by a referendum. I think the English would claim their own devolution from Europe if they were forced into a centralising treaty and denied their promised referendum.
The Scottish nationalists - and perhaps the Irish - would not want to lose their own devolutionary gains. Alex Salmond was the most successful politician of 2007 - he could hold a Scottish referendum on the Lisbon treaty that could be a knockout challenge to Mr Brown. That would set a good example to the rest of the United Kingdom. Promising a referendum and then refusing it is a most dangerous policy for Mr Brown and the Lib Dem leader, Nick Clegg. It is bad to break one's word - it is even worse to be found out.
Give it a NO!
Torben A. Petersen, Denmark, DK
What galls me the most, is the blatant reluctance of all politicians to allow "The People" to have their say. It makes me wonder exactly what are they afraid of? Perchance they are aware the British people as a whole have had enough of the EU, and a NO vote to the Lisbon treaty would be the beginning of the end for the European Empire...
Those same politicians would do well to remember their fat pay packets are filled from the taxes of the people, the very same people who place the X in the box to elect them.
It has been said the British people are slow to anger, that is true. However, as was discovered over the Poll Tax some years ago, and during the Fuel Protests, when the British people are angered the result is more than just impressive. I can foresee an occassion in the not too distant future where the current british Government will be impressed.
Politicians of all sides beware, you can lose your jobs easily and be replaced with just as much ease.
Andy Unwin, Sarasota, Florida
I think that this will be the straw that breaks the camels back. Where do I sign up for the revolution? Gordan Brown needs to be reminded that the last Scottish leader who plotted with Europe against England was Charles I.
Paul, Bucks, England
Sir,
We don't just want some of it back ,we want all of it back, permanently, a Referendum was promised more than once, most of us simply do not recognise this illegal organisation.
Clive Burghard , LANCING, England
The French and the Dutch made it clear that he EU constitution wouldn't do and saved the other states from the bother of further unnecessary referenda. Then came a reflection period. Now we have a Lisbon treaty instead which can be dealt with via our own Parliament, again saving us all from the bother of an unnecessary referendum.
Happily there are no promises broken. So what's the problem? Surely it's better to reduce burdens rather than keep inventing them.
Mrs.Josephine Hyde-Hartley, Bacup,
"Parliament is there to act on behalf of the people".
Is Professor Gormley suggesting that, on the basis of this reason, referendum is, per se, useless? I dont't think so. Maybe Professor Gormley want to rectify his (legally speaking) strikingly superficial opinion.
Kind regards.
riccardo, brussels,
Where is the voice of the people in the determination of their future?
You promised us a Referendum - and you must deliver a Referendum or the People will deliver a Revolution!
You have been soundly warned, Brown and Co!
Mike Williams, Lincoln,
In the North East we had a referrendum about a year back about the creation of an area of regional government. The result was an overwhelming rejection of the proposal by the people of the North East.
This did not go down well with the politicians pushing the idea (which I suspect was designed to give Blair a job closer to home on his stepping down as PM). Prescott came on the news to tell us that we weren't bright enough to know what we voted against.
Guess what - we are now having regional government quietly imposed on us. Of what value is a referrendum if the government has already decided on the result?
Andy Middleton, Berwick-upon-Tweed, Great Britain
Is it anti-European to want to keep a democratically elected government instead of faceless, foreigners against which we have no recourse? I don't believe its impossible to stay out of Europe and still negotiate with it. Why is it all or nothing, as the ignorant or self-interested pro-Europe brigade would have you believe?
It's a free ride for those in charge, and frankly it terrifies me to think what's going to happen in the next 10 years with this weak bunch of incompetent ministers steering us toward disaster.
Perhaps the thought of someone else being in charge appeals to this bunch of morons who couldn't run a childrens party. In which case, what are they doing in government in the first place?
Britain's fallen a very long way.
Ross Liversidge, Ripon, UK
The same sad and tired anti-EU rhetoric from a sad and tired Mr Mogg, who only know one tune. And again he chooses to misinterpret the facts: The Welsh and Scottish Nationalists are NOT anti EU they are anti UK. Given a referendum the English would also vote independence from this West Lothian Government. The SNP have always been very precise Independence for Scotland within the European Union.
Independence means staying in, and being a major player in the European Union. To be outside of the Union is isolation not Independence.
But let’s face it: Mr Mogg and his Murdock master's version of independence is greater and closer union with (and total dependence and subservience to), the USA!
Peter Goddard, Epsom, England, EU
The problem with England and the English is that apathy is rife among the masses and until the underbelly of this great nation awkes it will always lie in the stench that is europes gravy train. For god sake wake up we are no longer the uk we are just a part of a mainland europe that is to be broken into regions England does not exist in brussels and will no longer here unless WE DO SOMETHING NOW!!
barry faust, Portsmouth, England
The English people are an easy going, fair minded people,
slow to lose their temper. But they have never been a cowardly
people, if the MPs who are so keen to betray us and hand
over our parliamentary democracy to an emerging dictatorship,
think the English people are gutless and will just accept
it, they may be in for a shock, as Charles 1st and James 2nd
were, two arrogant monarchs who were dethroned by the
English nation.
Roderick, Hampshire, England
"Laurence Gormley is Professor of European Law and Jean Monnet Professor at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands, and Professor at the College of Europe, Bruges. He was called to the Bar (Middle Temple) in 1978 and was awarded the Hon. Sir Peter Bristow Award for that year. He was an Official at the European Commission from 1983-1990, and in 1990 was appointed to the Chair of European Law in Groningen."
Peter, Manchester, England
The eminent Victorian lawyer Dicey said that Government governs only with the consent of the people, and that when that consent is lost, the people have the right to use any necessary means to remove the government from office and replace it.
Whatever it takes, that is what we must now do
Idris Francis, Petersfield, UK
As an expat who still remains a British Citizen, I object to having my country handed over on a silver platter to those very people who for centuries have tried to take it by storm.
If the people of Britain are enslaved into this Euro Empire, which is the undeniable outcome of a ratification of this Lisbon Treaty then all that my father and uncles fought for in WW2 and all those in our precious homeland who fought in previous wars will be for naught .
This treaty is all about increased powers for multinational corporatists and their lackeys. Those who will suffer under this Euro police state are the very people that government is sworn to protect, the citizens Great Britain.
The Government is acting in a treasonous manner and in earlier times they would be hanged for their actions.
Ratification of this treaty will be one of the last independent acts our so called 'government of the people' will partake in.
They may as well unfurl a banner stating "Welcome to the Fourth Reich"
Robert Gordon Moss, Lakeside, Ontario,, Canada
Rees-Mogg is correct in all particulars but wrong in his conclusion.
In 1945 Britain was badly knocked about, but all its European competitors were far worse off, with their industry and infrastructure devastated. We had a tremendous opportunity to build a powerful economy and a social 'New Jerusalem'.
After over sixty years, when we compare ourselves with other major European countries, we have had the highest taxation, yet our manufacturing base is devastated, we have many times more jobless than official numbers admit, we have inefficient, undemocratic Government, ineffective policing, and the worst health, education and transport systems. Even Spain, after nearly forty years of dictatorship, is now a haven for those with enough money to leave. Both Labour and Tory parties are to blame.
The European Union, with all its corruption and mismanagement, has been unable to reproduce the appallingly incompetent governance of the British Isles.
Join Europe and live.
Peter Lloyd, BLACKER HILL, South Yorkshire
David Green has hit on a sensible question: "Will we need so many national MPs post-Lisbon?" We should campaign for a reduction (by half - say for England, more for the devolved celtic fringe) in the number of Westminster MPs - linked to the transfer of power to Brussels following ratification of Lisbon. Then at least we can all enjoy the spectacle of turkeys voting for Christmas. After all larger countries than ours such as the U.S. manage with smaller legislatures.
Richard Walton, Pershore, England
One must remember that the Lisbon Treaty was a big fraud won by the left wing socialist. New Labor is committed to EU socialist control. The language from old to New Labor changed but the goal did not. Tony Blair having no real inner beliefs used New Labor for his personal power. If giving in to undemocratic EU power grabs was the price....so be it. The British people should be more aware of their coming loss of self rule and democratic control of their nation and lives.
Daniel Sullivan, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil
The whingeing crew of Europhiles above would be right, in their cry "to let the chosen representatives make the decision", if only the House of Commons was truly representative of the people of the UK. Less than 25% of elegible voters put Tony Blair and his cronies in power. Who voted for Lord Falconer? or Lord Goldsmith or any other of the spin doctors that "rule" the UK. There is one and only one way of finding the true feelings of the people and that is to hold a referendum. It wold not surprise me if all three parties renig on their solemn promise to "let the people decide". Come the revolution the executioner will be busy.
Patrick Harris, Portsmouth, England
A total betrayal typical of the broken promises of this corrupt government. The sooner Brown and his cronies are out the better. My father (a commando) fought in WW2 for the rights of this country - he would turn in his grave at the duplicity of the politicians who are now giving everything away he fought for.
D A Littlewood, sheffield, UK
David Miliband said, “The reform treaty gives Britain a bigger voice in Europe. The Lisbon Treaty gives the EU a bigger and louder voice in the World. It transfers the Royal Prerogative to the EU (Art 46A Legal Personality), and it " invites the EU's High Representative" to take the seat on the UN Security Council which means when someone SPEAKS for US, we have lost our voice. This applies in everything to do with the EU until eventually everyone will have forgotten we ever HAD a VOICE or that there was ever a Country called the United Kingdom of Great Britain or a Nation of British people.
Anne, Wolverhampton,, England
May I mention something singularly instructive here about doing battle against the EU Powers and Principalities?
Treaty of Nice rejected by Irish voters on 7 June 2001.
Treaty of Nice then promptly resubmitted to Irish voters after 'No' vote.
Treaty approved on 19 October 2002.
Bosco, Bantry, Ireland
As mentioned we did not have a vote for the pro-american
war on Iraq, or even more importantly the decision by
the UK establishment to allow over 1 million immigrants
from eastern europe using EU laws this is total duplicity
whilst we continue to be anti european.
The establishment and city have ruined this country living
in ivory towers is great I would hate to be in the UK in ten years
time, most city people will be in Monaco.
Sick
Tom Davis, liverpool,
Nick Clegg is one of the real villains of this scenario .If he hadn`t gone back on his party`s word to the voters to have this referendum then Labour would probably lose the vote ,as it is....
Clegg is clearly guilty of treachery ,let`s hope that the electorate wake up to this at the next election .
I understand that the Democracy Movement with help from other anti EU pressure groups is running a referendum in his constituency so that he can see what the response is like close to home .No one who values their democracy should vote for him or his party ever again.
At least this vote will sort out the wheat from the chaff.
Bring back ETFA all is forgiven-at least they didn`t want to control our lives and hit our pockets.
Petrina Holdsworth, Uckfield, East Sussex
This is true of all parties all the time but in any case party manifestos are not promises. Your case for a referendum is paper thin and your reasons for wishing to have one show through. The British voters don t give a damn about handing over more powers to the European federalist bureaucracy since they don t have any to hand over. The only people who will be losing out in that context is possibly the British centralist bureaucracy, and the British voter has a dim view of them. The ordinary British voter is not in any position to understand the issues involved in the treaty, and in the one case in which a representative democracy is positively to the point you are suggesting the nonsense of a referendum. The average British voter should also have the sense to see that he is going to benefit from a bureaucracy which is bound to consider the general issues which affect him, as opposed to the indigenous bureaucracy which is frequently bound by establishment interests to his disadvantage.
Henry Percy, London, UK
I'm not sure about the details;I haven't really followed it.But one thing I do know.Promises should always be honoured!
H.D, WsM,
But your Golden Boy Cameron will not commit the Tory Party to a referendum if he becomes Prime Minister,he is scared stiff of splitting the Tory party again.Cameron is hiding the truth he will keep the UK in the EU under this treaty.The Eurosceptics are in cuckoo land if they think he will do anything else.Only UKIP are willing to make that commitment.In the end all this hot air from Cameron will do nothing to stop the Treaty being passed.He as always only wants to try and score points.
Bill Rees, Truro, Cornwall
Britain, notably England, is almost impossible to outrage, and our MPs know that, they are used to it, and rely on this as they knowingly, and knowing that we know, enact legislation based on a lie and throwing away tranches of democratic government in some mad act of faith.
I am beginning to wonder if these mendacious MPs are still right. Resentment is indeed rising, despite the wonderful buffering of the issue by the BBC - Ed Stourton did not even raise the Treaty issue with Brown in his recent wide ranging interview. The BBC is the great EU weapon for Labour now.
When democratic processes are ignored, trashed, treated so contemptuously, that is dangerous: why should we trust Parliament any more? Where does that take us....
Timon, Witney, UK
"The Euro-sceptics should grow up. A Referendum is not appropriate: Parliament is there to act on behalf of the people."
Yes, it is terribly childish to expect people to keep their promises, isn't it?
Still, I'm glad in a way. Labour have sealed their fate at the next election. I doubt we will see them in power for a good 20 years.
Good riddance.
Matt ODonnell, London, UK
The laws in this country have become anti-democratic and against the ordinary citizen. Having constitutional oversight by the EU is actually a good thing. It would be great if British people would recognize that.
Basil, Cambridge,
The Rees-Mogg take on the denied EU Referendum is spot on.The government offered the UK voters a chance to have their say on this important treaty at the last election why on earth should we be treated like fools on a need to know basis and be cheated out of our say.The Foreign Secretary seems a little out of his depth so lets remind this government about their promise and please some of the transparency the EU is always telling its citizen's about should be honoured too.The treaty is the same it is a confidence trick to imply that they have changed it please lets have some truths and the right to vote.
Margot Parker, Kettering, UK
Where would the UK be if we had stayed with EFTA (European Free Trade Association)? http://www.efta.int/ . Well, we would only be involved with the EEA (European Economic Area) ie. only 300 regulstions a year instead of 1,000+. With EFTA you run your own: fisheries, agriculture, justuce, home affairs, aid and more. Click on the website and you'll find powerpoints with 'seminars' and charts and graphs at 'this is efta'. We need a referendum of: a) continue with EU, or b) switch to EFTA. I've visited them. They only have a staff of 90 vs 20,000+ for the EU. This is simple. When will the Times let their readers know about this off-the-shelf option.
Hugo van Randwyck, London, UK
"A Referendum is not appropriate: Parliament is there to act on behalf of the people."
(1) The Parliament in question was elected on the basis that it would NOT make that decision, but submit it to the people.
(2) Parliament does not in any case have the right to give away powers which do not belong to it, but are only delegated for a few years by the people.
Alex Swanson, Milton Keynes, UK
Rees-Mogg says the Constitution was supposed to remedy the democratic deficit in Europe, but that the Lison Treaty makes the situation worse. This is patently not the case, given that the institutional changes designed to make the system mopre democratic remain unchanged from the Constitutional Treaty.
On the whole I believe the Treaty should be welcomed by Eurosceptics - it makes very clear the limits of the EU's powers, simplifies the whole structure of the Union and, imprtantly for sceptics, sets in place a procedure whereby national parliaments can check legislation for compliance with the principle of subsidiarity. It is all very well being a Eurosceptic, but the fact is that the UK is not going to secede from the Union - it is politically inconceivable. Like it or not, it's here to stay, and therefore we should take the chance to streamline it. This treaty is really more about institutional reform than anything else.
Emma Dring, Cambridge, UK
This is just another anti-European rant, which falls far short of any analytical standard. The Treaty is not perfect, but what Act of Parliament is perfect? It is, however, a major step forward towards better decision-making, a more flexible common European home for the Member States and their peoples, and incorporates the better points of the Constitution. National Parliaments have a greater role, and judicial protection is improved. The Euro-sceptics should grow up. A Referendum is not appropriate: Parliament is there to act on behalf of the people.
Professor Laurence Gormley, Groningen, Netherlands
"anti-democratic" "decietful" "dishonourable"
- Well of course it is! It is the Gordon Brown Way!
Peter, London, EU
Miliband says it is up to Parliament to decide on the new treaty
when the interviewer on BBC pointed out that the select committee said that it was virtually the same as the old one.
So now we have a catch 22 where Labour promised a referendum to ensure a majority in Parliament at the last election.
Once they have attained a majority now say it is up to Parliament.
This duplicity will not go unnoticed in the next election.
A Walton, Leicester, England
Following this logic, shouldn't there then have been a referendum on the war on Iraq? Why can MPs decide about that against the will of the people, but not now on something that will make peoples' lives better all over Europe (Britain included)?
Peter Forsberg, London,
I'd take issue with your assumption that a manifesto commitment at a general election would substitute for a referendum. 40 or so percent of the total vote is sufficient to be returned as the winning party in a general election, but at least 50 percent is required to decide a referendum.
Stephen, London,
"The treaty is a defeat for the idea of a liberal democratic Europe; it is surprising that British Liberal Democrats are among its keenest supporters. "
I'm not at all surprised. The Britsh Liberal Democrats hate the idea of Britain, are not liberal and are certainly not democrats.
Tam Earl-Aine, Cheltenham,
A referendum was promised...........Then By God, there should be one.
The dictatorial, undemocratic nature of the EU , will lead to tears....
We need to disengage asap....before it takes our own Fort Sumter to do so.
N Wilson, Bourne, Lincs
Rees-Mogg has once again stated the case for a referendum clearly and logically. Since Mr Salmond basically agrees with it as a political means to distance Scotland from England, I can see no possibility of his requiring one.The Republic of Ireland would seem to be the only barrier to its ratification and the people of the republic may well use it as a means of gaining more largesse, as they did when refusing Cyprus's entry. However, the main problem at the core of the treaty is, as Rees-Mogg has identified, its democratic deficit. The EU is beginning to take on the appearance of an empire with an increase in centralised, bureaucratic power. It must also be pointed out, however, that the debate is largely over in continental Europe. Greece is in the middle of a major scandal which may bring down its government but even before the scandal broke, the Lisbon treaty received scant mention in the press and TV. The other major question is: Will we need so many national MPs post-Lisbon?
Dr David Green, Athens, Greece
Frankly I have not been given enough information to say either way whether this is a good treaty or not, both sides have put forward different opinions.
What I do know is that I was promised by all parties a referendum and as far as I am concerned this is a contract. To not hold a referendum is to lie, everyone agrees the treaty is the same as the constitution.
If we go ahead with ratifying this treaty I for one would hope that Mr Salmond would hold a Scottish referendum where I would definitely vote not to ratify.
Politicians are seen as being corrupt and instead of the promised improvements are simply getting worse. If I claim monies on my expenses that I am not allowed I will be sacked immediately even if I try to argue that I forgot, did not have the time, made a mistake. Time to clean house and any breach of the rules should be immediate dismissal and loss of any pensions etc.
I am for one sick of the MPs bleeding us dry.
joe, Edinburgh, Scotland
Now I'm sure I saw a comma in one sentence where the original treaty had a semi colon so that clearly makes it an entirely different thing...
Jay, London,
Stroll on, Moggy, Guardian of democracy.
joe, Berwickshire, scotland
You have said it - " Eurosceptics hate the treaty".
But why be an Eurosceptic?
Bob, London,