Downing Street yesterday appeared to rule out giving British voters a say on the new EU treaty that is set to replace the failed European constitution.

No 10 said that the style of the new treaty proposed by Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, meant that the referendum promised by Tony Blair in 2004 would no longer be appropriate.

Mr Blair is confident that EU leaders will agree at next week’s summit to make the new document an “amending treaty” — which updates previous agreements — and drop all references to a constitution.

However, the summit will be one of his final acts as Prime Minister and his successor, Gordon Brown, is certain to face calls to honour the referendum pledge if the document is seen to hand new powers to Brussels.

A bluffer's guide to the EU treaty

Our correspondent hacks through the verbiage to explain what happened at the EU summit and what it means

• Patchwork deal proves Europe cannot heal its deepest wounds

BACKGROUND

• Unconstitutional

• Fresh start or revived constitution?

• Merkel’s dream; Britain’s nightmare

• Brown’s first test: how to avoid an EU constitution

• Europe divided over summit plans

Related Links

• The twins who could be a stumbling block to unity

• Full text: Merkel's blueprint for Europe

• Poland ‘is ready to wreck everything if our voting demands are not met’

Downing Street yesterday also set out four “red lines” that it said Britain would not cross during the treaty talks, paving the way for an opt-out on moves to extend qualified-majority voting into police and judicial processes.

Two of the red lines, protecting Britain’s right to set its labour and social regulation and rejecting any interference with the “scope, cost or financial structure of our social security system”, would mean changes in the proposed Charter of Fundamental Rights.

This would be a tough battle because most EU nations want to give full legal force to the charter, which was a key part of the constitution rejected by French and Dutch voters in 2005.

Mr Blair’s spokeswoman insisted yesterday that the Government would be free from its pledge to hold a referendum if the final treaty was an amending treaty rather than a constitution. “We think Europe is moving in our direction on this,” she said.

Despite accusations that the style of the treaty is being used as cover for a U-turn on a referendum, especially as much of the content is likely to be the same as the failed constitution, Margaret Beckett, the Foreign Secretary, also argued that there would be no need for a vote.

“We are specifically calling for an amending treaty and we have had many amending treaties to the existing European treaties over the years, none of which have attracted a referendum,” she said.

Ministers are preparing to argue that the Maastricht treaty, signed by the Conservative Government of John Major in 1994, changed Britain’s relationship with the EU more than the present proposal.

William Hague, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, said: “When the Government finally accepted popular demand for a referendum, Tony Blair explicitly said that ‘what you can’t do is have a situation where you get a rejection of the treaty and then you just bring it back with a few amendments and say we will have another go’. Yet that is exactly what ministers now seem to be doing.”

Allies of Gordon Brown insist that a referendum could still be held. They agree that the implication is that if the red lines are breached the proposed arrangements would have to be put to the people in an unwinnable referendum.

— President Sarkozy of France has proposed Tony Blair as the first full-time president of the European Union, it was reported last night. Downing Street aides denied that the Prime Minister had any interest in the job.

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• What makes the perfect mum?
• To keep me stress-free, no more awareness days, please
• What do lottery winners buy?