MPs voted not to give us a referendum on the EU Reform Treaty by 311 to 248, this is despite all three main parties promising a referendum.
Labour and the Lib Dems both claim that the EU Reform Treaty and EU constitution are different enough not to warrant a referendum - this is an outright lie.
The EU Reform Treaty produces the same end result as the constitution except references to the flag and anthem of the EU are moved to an appendix which is voluntary.
The constitution replaced existing treaties, the EU Reform Treaty amends them. The payload is the same, it is the method of delivery that is different.
A private referendum by iwantareferendum.com showed that 88 per cent of the electorate wants a referendum on the treaty. David Wright and all the other (mainly Labour) MPs who voted against a referendum did so in the full knowledge they were going against the wishes of their constituents.
I will do everything I can to ensure that David Wright loses his seat at the next election for his treachery.
Stuart Parr, Brookside
20 Comments
Good for you namesake. If thousands of other people did
the same in each constituency where the sitting MP reneged
on the party’s promise to let us have a referendum, they
would soon learn that treachery and flaunting the
expectations and wishes of the electorate by voting against
them would cost them very dear.
But we shouldn’t be to surprised should we, manifestos
mean nothing, promises are meant to be broken, waffle,
rhetoric, downright deceit, spin and betrayal are all the
stock in trade of MPs, particularly those of New Labour.
Report abuse
311 or 248 of them ? Just a thought…!!!
Report abuse
They promised a referendum on a constiution. This wasn’t a constitution, it was a treaty, no more significant in many ways than those that have gone before. The ‘Little Englanders’ lost - end of story.
Report abuse
Well done Peter top marks for blindly and unquestionable following the party line.
However no matter what they call the Lisbon thingy it will become the constitution of the EU, just like all previous treaties. The EU treaties are treaties between nation states, they set up and define the rules for a third party in this case the EU. Hence Lisbon is the constitution of the EU.
You are of course totally free to believe anything you wish, but please do not try to pull the wool over the eyes of people who have studied the European Project because we do happen to know of what we speak.
And please do try to be reasonably up to date with your insults - Little Englanders -when out with the ark, can you people not ever manage to keep up with an ever changing world of empty meaningless rhetoric.
Report abuse
CALM DOWN DEARS !!!
Report abuse
Yes quiet right, I am sorry, but I get so annoyed with these totally misleading unthinking party line soundbites that do nothing to either clarify the likely results of ratification of this already complicated treaty or deepen the debate. But rather seem intended to pigeonhole those of us who are increasingly concerned and have very serious questions as some sort of lunatics.
Report abuse
You shouldn’t think like that Ken and you should not be
sorry, your views are just as valid as those of the
Peter’s of this world and, based on the fact that even
the author of it said that it was the same and all
opinion polls indicated that a referendum was right and
proper - you are with the majority in the country - not
in Westminster where New Labour lived up to it’s long
standing record of deceit.
“Little Englander’s”, I seem to remember someone else
saying that at the start of the last war, they were
German, they were facist and they wanted to put this
country down. It put’s those who use it now in good company
doesn’t it. It also indicates of course that those who
use the phrase now don’t know what the heck they are
talking about. In fact, those that do use it are not
worth bothering to debate with. THEY ARE THE LUNATICS.
Report abuse
Democracy ain’t easy and everybody has a view - frustrating but necessary !!!!
Report abuse
Nothing to do with the party line Ken - I’ve never been a member of any political party.
I’m sure we’d never reach agreement on whether or not the content of the treaty was sufficiently similar to the constitution to amke them indistinguishable, but the plain fact remains that it was officially a treaty, and not a constitution - so no electoral promises have been broken.
As for the ‘Little Englander’ comment, it wasn’t intended as an insult. The fact of the matter is that there is a hardcore minority in this country who are being very dishonest in demanding a vote on ‘the constitution’ when in fact they want us to withdraw from the EU.
I am increasingly concerned that there are sufficient ill-informed xenophobic people (not aimed at you!) in this country, who when backed by a sensationalist largely right-wing press, might swell the ‘anti’ numbers and possibly get us out, leaving the already hard-pressed workers of this country at the mercy of global US) capitalism, thus fatally undermining our future.
Report abuse
Peter please try to understand the Constitution was also a treaty, its title was:-
A Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe.
In fact I can remember one professor who taught EU politics arguing in the press, at the time, that the constitution was not a constitution because its title included the word treaty. You are now trying to suggest because the Lisbon Treaty does not include the word constitution it is not a constitution, well both you and the professor are wrong, what they decide to call something is immaterial to its function. And the EU treaties functions are to create or change the constitution for the EU. They can call it Margaret and it would still be the Constitution.
In any event, the point that is being obscured is that, this, like all other treaties effects the way we in Briton are to be governed in the future, they all have removed some areas of government policy away from our parliament to a higher supranational arena, over which we do not have national control.
Now to my mind that is a matter for the people of this nation to decide if we want to do that, it should not be left within the power of a short term parliament to simply decide to outsource the authority we invest in them in this way.
The argument advanced by some that we should not have a referendum because we have not been allowed a referendum on the other treaties is wrong, and as the saying goes five wrongs do not make a right. We should have been allowed a referendum at each of those other treaties. You for instance may be happy to be have been made a citizen of the EU by the conservative party but do you really believe that a political party that just gained held power on something like 36% of the votes has the moral authority to decide on your citizenship.
There is also no doubt that the Lisbon Treaty affects our British constitution, that is proven by the fact that the French have just voted to change their constitution to allow for the introduction of the Lisbon treaty and the fact that the Irish Constitution makes it compulsory for the people to be consulted on changes to their constitution and they are holding their referendum in June.
With respect if you do not want to classed with the other morons who have no knowledge of the EU and the way it affects us then please steer clear of using their rhetoric, in it is meaningless claptrap. And despite what you say is quite clearly intended to insult.
I do not see dishonesty in opposing this treaty, if, the end game is to leave the EU, if you want to reveres the direction you first must to stop the ball rolling. After all we have not reached this stage in the unification process in one big jump but by small steps each requiring a change in the constitution, over a period of thirty odd years. Would it also not be considered equally dishonest to argue to accept this treaty when we do not know the end position of the EU project?
You would have to put some bones on those contentious suggestions, it is far to easy to throw unsubstantiated epithets into the ring. Would it for instance REALLY - fatally undermine the future of our sovereign nation state,- to reclaim its powers from an anti -democratic socialist project in Europe. WOULD IT REALLY?
Report abuse
I am increasingly concerned that there are sufficient
“well-informed” (self styled of course) people
of this country, who, from their own inflated
sense of always being right, backed by a largely left
wing press and contemptuous of the views of others might
swell the “pro” numbers and possibly get us into the EU
and leaving the already hard-pressed workers of this country
at the mercy of that EU conglomeration, thus fatally
undermining our future.
Such people as these, thinking that they are “spouting off”
from the moral high ground of the poor oppressed workers
rights fail to appreciate that the TUC voted overwhelmingly
in September last year in favour of a referendum on the basis
that the country had been promised one and that there was
no definable difference between the Constitution and the Treaty.
The GMB General Secretary, Paul Kenny said, “THE PROPOSED
TREATY CLEARLY FALLS WITHIN THE PROMISES MADE BY THE
GOVERNMENT TO THE ELECTORATE AT THE LAST ELECTION AND TO
REFUSE TO HONOUR THIS BY DUCKING AND DIVING MAY COST THE
LABOUR PARTY AT THE NEXT ELECTION”. How right you are Paul.
In an ICM Poll in June last year 88% of Trade Union members
backed a demand for a referendum on the basis that the
Treaty and the Constitution were one and the same.
In the face of 5 million Trade Union members wanting a
referendum, one lone arrogant plaintiff voice springs to
their “defence” and would deny them that in order to
protect them from the ravages of global (US) capitalism.
I always thought that Trade Union members were intelligent
people, quite capable of making their own decisions, more
than capable of interpreting issues that are of direct
concern to them and not likely to appreciate someone in effect
telling them that they are in effect “Little Englanders”.
Report abuse
Sadly, and once again Stuart, you have little to offer but personal insults.
I don’t think you can safely make the assumption that 5 million trade union members want a referendum. I’m a trade union member, and have been for more than 25 years - no-one asked me, nor am I aware of any other trade union member of my acquaintance being asked.
We have a stark choice - we either throw our hat in with Europe or we are forced to be at the whim of the US, as we already sadly are when it comes to war-mmongering. You are apparently much-vexed by the alleged waste inherent within the EU, yet we hear little from you on the billions wasted on crusades in Afghanistan and Iraq by oil-greedy fundamentalist Christians - do you really want the workers of this country to be in thrall to these people?
Report abuse
My wife tells me on her return from Poland, that nearly every moment possible on TV was put aside to a Gov’t advert condemning the LISBON TREATY and what they see as a liberal elite running the EU. The anti-EU brigade exist outside our shores too and I am pleased about that.
I am a Left of centre voter who hates the EU and I remember when Enoch Powell, Barbara Castle [who I've met] and Tony Benn [who I've met] sitting on the same podium when the anti-Common Market views were rife in the 1960’s and 1970’s.
Lets have a similar debate now and see where the real colours of our politicians lie !!! All I know is if Harold Wilson had seen where Labour would be in relation to the EU in 2008, he would have joined the podium with the above, whilst still enjoying that CONDOR moment.
Report abuse
Typical dusty, decaying and pessimistic nonsense from the average dying species know as Euro”septics” - time for your afternoon nap and turgid descent into the past.
Report abuse
On a point of accuracy, the term ‘Little Englander’ dates back to the time of the Boer War, when those that wanted Britain to withdraw from its commitments to the Empire and withdraw to within the UK borders.
Interstingly, I’ve only found references to the idea of Hitler using the term on the websites of some pretty offensive websites belonging to extreme Right-wing groups.
Hitler may have used the term, although it wasn’t in a well-known speech if he did. Its more common usage these days is to describe those of our fellow countrymen who have irrational superstitions and/or fear regarding all things foreign. The sort of people who go on holiday to Greece or Spain and drink nothing but English beer and demand nothing but full English breakfasts and roast dinners, because they ‘won’t eat that foreign muck’.
I don’t think such people are likely to have a balanced view of the pros and cons of being in Europe, nor of the consequences for Britain if we were to withdraw.
Report abuse
Peter: You seem to have missed the important part of Stuart`s post (an ICM Poll in June last year 88% of Trade Union members backed a demand for a referendum) Thus it would seem that your trade union leaders used a poll to determine the wishes of its members and then voted accordingly.
Now I would fully agree that this is not a purely democratic way of conducting business and perhaps the unions should have held a referendum on the point. You and your friends would then have the benefit of knowing that you had been consulted on a very important decision. At the very least had they held a referendum within the union, the options would have been openly debated and you would have had the opportunity to voice your opinions and to argue your point of view. Even if you lost the referendum you would still have the benefit of knowing that it was a democratic decision supported by the majority of your Union’s members.
Perhaps I do not have to finish the argument line?
You say we have a stark choice the EU or the USA and quote the war as evidence, but you fail to remember, it was the British Prime Minister who proposed that we join the USA in the war, it was the British Parliament who voted to support the USA in the war and it was the British people who had the opportunity to remove Mr Blair for his warmongering. Given the avowed antipathy towards the war, I for one was surprised that Labour held on to their majority at the last election, especially as there was one party which stood on a platform of opposing the war.
The USA has no legal or moral authority to enforce our compliance with its wishes that decision remains, at this time, solely within the sovereign power of the UK.
You are right we do face a stark choice, but it is not between the EU and USA, but between retaining our sovereign independence or passing even more of it out of our direct control.
Given your obvious antagonism towards the USA you should fully understand that previous point. We have the free choice at any time to decide whether we want to support the USA or any other country, on anything, we can make our decisions on what we feel is best for our country at any given point on any subject. And further more if we the people of this country do not accept the direction our government has chosen we can remove them from office and literally change directional policy. Had we for instance all voted LibDem at the last election we would no longer be embroiled in Iraq.
Within the EU system we remove the opportunity of making that free choice, because our National sovereignty is compromised. Within the areas of EU competency neither our Ministers our Parliament or we the people have the opportunity of exercising free choice. We cannot affect the direction of the EU by voting against our government because our government cannot affect the direction of the EU from a national perspective. We cannot even affect the direction of our government because it is bound by EU rules.
You may or you may not, agree with the EU funding organisation like Hammas, but there is nothing any of us can do about it, you may wish to insist that the EU does get its house in order over its finances, but again there is nothing you can do about it. You may not agree with the introduction of GM crops, or the EU fishing policy, or CAP, or the destruction of our rail network, or postal service, or a myriad of other subjects, but you are not being consulted, and because these are all EU areas of authority you are prevented from voting for or against them at the ballot box.
In Brighton 2005 the TUC Congress (without asking you personally) overwhelmingly rejected the “elitist, militarist, corporate and anti-democratic” EU constitution and reaffirmed their opposition to the planned Bolkesteinn directive on services.
And called for
1. an end to neo-liberal policies and the privatisation of public services;
2. the democratic rights of states, democracy and freedom;
3. the strengthening of trade union and workers rights; and
4. international peace and solidarity, not militarism
The real question is Peter do you support your trade union movement aims and objectives.
Report abuse
You wonder why people use insults. All they do is merely
return the “compliments” that you so frequently use to all
and sundry, together with a liberal dose of arrogance as
if no other view counts. Above you say the term
“Little Englander” was not used as a term of insult - then
above again you say “it’s more common usage” etc etc before
you go into a diatribe of insults.
Your last paragraph says more about the writer than those
to whom it refers. If this is what a “good education”
does then give me the poor Secondary Modern School failure
who you appear to have so much disdain for albeit you
are a socialist to the core.
As a matter of fact, I am more pro EU than anti - what
I cannot abide is this disgusting government insulting the
intelligence of the people by saying that the Constitution
and the Treaty are different and using this as a basis for
breaking their pledge to the country to allow us a
referendum.
I also ate “foreign muck”, as a member of the Overseas
Civil Service for many years - I had to but I still demand
good beer and roast dinners when they are available.
I have been to Spain once, Greece twice and Africa and
Asia many times, by the sound of things, you have been to
Heaven as well, as you appear so “well informed” - sorry,
I can’t compete with that. I am a mere mortal but that
doesn’t make me defer to those that are not. A little more
humility, respect for other view points and a little less
of “know it all” would likely meet up with a more regular
response.
Report abuse
Apologies, my mistake, the above was addressed to Peter.
Report abuse
In King Henry VIII period to think that the church of England could be anything but lead by a Pope in Rome was heresy beyond belief. King Henry cut the cord from Rome and here we are 100’s of years later fairly civilised and propserous with an independent church !!!
We can run our own affairs in GB without the EU and the arguements which are used in 2008 to keep us affiliated with this so called democratic institution [old boys club more like], are no better than the arguements once used in GB to keep us all affilaited to Rome and the Pope.
GB can thrive and survive without the EU !!! All we need is the will and the guts to do so [and the right leader of course].
Report abuse
Opinion seems divided,but the question remains unanswered-what do the people want?Labour don’t care and why the hell should they when they dictate and we keep voting them in.Immigration,high taxes and oppression are the result of labours love affair with Europe.For those of you who have read the “Treaties”,you will have noticed that it is the wolf of the constitution in the sheep’s treaty clothing.If British people want to be a minority who are dictated to by European parliament,then vote Lib/lab/Con.
Report abuse