EU in/out referendum bill debated in the Lords


Blackleaf
#1
The House of Lords is debating a bill that would allow there to be a 2017 referendum on whether or not Britain should leave the EU.

PM David Cameron has already pledged to hold a referendum in 2017 if the Tories win the next election. The bill, introduced by Tory MP James Wharton, would write the pledge into law.

The bill passed its final stage in the Commons in November despite efforts by MPs of the anti-democratic, pro-EU Left wing parties of Labour and the Liberal "Democrats" to delay its passage.

It is likely to face a tougher time in the Lords, where it could be derailed.

James Wharton has acknowledged his bill would have a tougher time in the upper house but said: "For an unelected house to deny the British people a say on a bill which has been passed by the elected House of Commons, I think, would put them in a very difficult position."

Among the peers due to speak in the debate are Lord Howe of Aberavon and TV cook Nigella Lawson's father Lord Lawson of Blaby (both of whom served as Chancellor of the Exchequer in Thatcher's government), former Labour leader and EU commissioner Lord Kinnock, Conservative and former EU commissioner Lord Tugendhat, ex-cabinet secretaries Lord Turnbull and Lord Armstrong of Ilminster, and crossbench peer and historian Lord Hennessy of Nympsfield.

Britain last had an EU in/out referendum in 1975, in which the people voted to remain in the EU, but nobody below the age of 60 now has had a chance to have a say on the issue.

EU referendum bill debated in Lords

10 January 2014
BBC News


The House of Lords is debating a bill that would allow a referendum on the UK's membership of the EU in 2017


The House of Lords is debating a bill that would allow a referendum on the UK's membership of the EU in 2017.

PM David Cameron has already pledged to hold a referendum in 2017 if the Tories win the next election. The bill, introduced by Tory MP James Wharton (Stockton South), would write the pledge into law.

The bill passed its final stage in the Commons in November despite Labour and Lib Dem efforts to delay its passage.

It is likely to face a tougher time in the Lords, where it could be derailed.

It is now being debated at second reading, the parliamentary stage at which MPs or peers consider the general principles of the legislation.

By convention, peers rarely vote against legislation at this stage, but sometimes seek to delay it.

Labour peer Lord Richard warned that if peers did not make sufficiently rapid progress in the debate he might seek to force a second day of second-reading debate.

That could mean that the bill's proponents will run out of time to get it through during this parliamentary session.

Even if it is granted a second reading and proceeds to more detailed scrutiny of its provisions, Labour, Lib Dem and pro-European Conservatives are expected to join forces to try to amend the bill.

If amended, the legislation would need to clear the Commons again by the end of February or it will again face the risk of running out of parliamentary time.

'Blunt instrument'

If this bill fails, the government could take the unusual step of re-introducing an identical bill and using the Parliament Act - a piece of legislation which enables the Commons to over-rule the Lords - to force it on to the statute books.

But despite David Cameron's backing for the bill - part of efforts to prove he is serious about holding a referendum - he may opt not to take such a step.

Even if the bill successfully becomes law it does not guarantee a referendum in 2017 since no Parliament can bind its successor.

Among the peers due to speak in the debate are former Conservative chancellors Lord Howe of Aberavon and Lord Lawson of Blaby, former Labour leader and EU commissioner Lord Kinnock, Conservative and former EU commissioner Lord Tugendhat, ex-cabinet secretaries Lord Turnbull and Lord Armstrong of Ilminster, and crossbench peer and historian Lord Hennessy of Nympsfield.

Lord Dobbs, the Conservative peer who is spearheading the bill's passage through the Lords, told Radio 4's Today programme that Europe had become a "pestilence in our political system" and "we need to get rid of this burden".

"Nobody below the age of 60 has ever had a chance to have a say on this issue," he said.

"We need to decide one way or another whether we are going to stick with Europe or leave."

But Labour peer and former European Commissioner Lord Mandelson said the threat of British exit would "diminish not enhance to get much-needed reforms in Europe".

"A referendum is a very blunt instrument that needs to be handled with great care," he told the same programme.

"Membership of the European Union is absolutely fundamental to British interests."

James Wharton has acknowledged his bill would have a tougher time in the upper house but said: "For an unelected house to deny the British people a say on a bill which has been passed by the elected House of Commons, I think, would put them in a very difficult position."

It is unlikely there will be a vote in the Lords on Friday, but the debate will set the scene for divisions to come.

Both the prime minister's deputy Nick Clegg and Labour leader Ed Miliband have warned of the uncertainty and damage to business they say would be caused by holding a referendum.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25672977
Last edited by Blackleaf; Jan 10th, 2014 at 08:25 AM..
 
Tecumsehsbones
+1
#2
The Duke of Beansandham and Lord Arseroger introduced a resolution that Britain should "give the wogs a good thumping," noting that "wogs begin at Calais." Immediately thereafter, the Lords recommended that King George III should give the Duke of Wellington overall command of the forces.
 
captain morgan
Bloc Québécois
+1
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by TecumsehsbonesView Post

The Duke of Beansandham and Lord Arseroger introduced a resolution that Britain should "give the wogs a good thumping," noting that "wogs begin at Calais." Immediately thereafter, the Lords recommended that King George III should give the Duke of Wellington overall command of the forces.


"The Duke of Beansandham and Lord Arseroger"

Spit some coffee reading that.

Thanks for helping get my Friday off to a great start

Lord and Lady Douchebag - YouTube

 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
+2
#4  Top Rated Post
Parting company with the EU would have my vote. I am all in favor of free trade but having a bunch of unelected bureaucraps in a foreign country making rules that have negative effects on your economy is not good. I'm surprised Germany has not bailed from this socialist tinkering model by now.
 
Blackleaf
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by TecumsehsbonesView Post

The Duke of Beansandham and Lord Arseroger introduced a resolution that Britain should "give the wogs a good thumping," noting that "wogs begin at Calais." Immediately thereafter, the Lords recommended that King George III should give the Duke of Wellington overall command of the forces.



It's not the wogs that begin at Calais. It's the Frogs that begin at Calais.

The wogs live in Bongo Bongo Land.


Last edited by Blackleaf; Jan 10th, 2014 at 11:42 AM..
 
Blackleaf
#6
The Daily Mail on the Left's contempt for the public over the EU:

DAILY MAIL COMMENT: Labour's contempt for the public on Europe


By Daily Mail Comment
11 January 2014
Daily Mail


Labour’s contempt for the public on Europe

Had Peter Mandelson and his cronies got their way, Britain would have long ago joined the disastrous single currency – with the most devastating consequences for jobs, businesses and families.

Yet, far from feeling humiliated by their appalling lack of judgment, The People Who Know Best still want to boss us all around on Europe.

Yesterday, this gilded elite was pouring scorn on David Cameron’s commitment to hold a referendum in 2017.


The gilded elite were pouring scorn on David Cameron's commitment to hold a referendum in 2017

In a typically contemptuous performance on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Lord Mandelson said EU membership was ‘absolutely fundamental’ and must not be ‘put in the hands’ of a public ‘lottery’.

In other words, he does not trust the electorate to deliver the verdict he wants – so will deny us any say whatsoever.

(Predictably the pro-EU BBC, so ferociously critical of the Tory Party over Europe, treated Lord Mandelson with reverence, with presenter Evan Davis even praising him for the strength of his argument!).

Later, in the House of Lords, it was the turn of Lord Kinnock – whose family has been made very wealthy indeed by the EU – to attack Mr Cameron for ‘prancing to the war drums’ of the Europhobes.

The fact that the Prime Minister’s position reflects the wishes of the overwhelming majority of the British public was considered irrelevant.


Lord Mandelson said EU membership was 'absolutely fundamental'

Ed Miliband’s Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats are expected to conspire in the upper chamber to scupper a backbench Bill – already passed by the Commons – that would enshrine the referendum promise in law.

The Bill is largely symbolic, since no Parliament can bind its successor.

But what the events of yesterday confirmed is that The People Who Know Best – who so shamefully denied the public a say over the Lisbon Treaty – are going to strain every sinew to ensure no referendum takes place in 2017, or ever.

The challenge for Mr Cameron – if he wishes to win the next election outright, and deliver on his promise – is to convince the voters that he is serious about his pledge to reclaim powers from Brussels.

The bitter irony is that if he fails, and a split Tory/Ukip vote allows Labour to limp into government, Lord Mandelson and his friends will have won by default, the people will be denied the right to express their opinion – and the EU’s grip on Britain will grow ever tighter.


Read more: DAILY MAIL COMMENT: Labour's contempt for the public on Europe | Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
 
Machjo
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Parting company with the EU would have my vote. I am all in favor of free trade but having a bunch of unelected bureaucraps in a foreign country making rules that have negative effects on your economy is not good. I'm surprised Germany has not bailed from this socialist tinkering model by now.

Remember though that the EU has its own democratically elected Parliament. Their the ones who determine EU policy, not bureaucrats.
 
Tecumsehsbones
+1
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

Remember though that the EU has its own democratically elected Parliament. Their the ones who determine EU policy, not bureaucrats.

Not that there's anything wrong with bureaucrats. They're usually knowledgeable professionals who only want to make things work well for the public. As opposed to the fools, blowhards, and psychopaths who are the mass of our elected "representatives."
 
Machjo
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by TecumsehsbonesView Post

Not that there's anything wrong with bureaucrats. They're usually knowledgeable professionals who only want to make things work well for the public. As opposed to the fools, blowhards, and psychopaths who are the mass of our elected "representatives."

You mean something like this:

'I'll lower your taxes, increase fundig for social programmes, keep inflation, the debt, and interest rates down, raise the iminimum wage to 50 dollars per hour, and create full employment. Now stop asking so many questions and just vote for me already!'

 
Tecumsehsbones
+1
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

You mean something like this:

'I'll lower your taxes, increase fundig for social programmes, keep inflation, the debt, and interest rates down, raise the iminimum wage to 50 dollars per hour, and create full employment. Now stop asking so many questions and just vote for me already!'

Nah, they're just liars. The ones that scare me are the ones who promise to return "morality" to the country.
 
Blackleaf
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by MachjoView Post

Remember though that the EU has its own democratically elected Parliament. Their the ones who determine EU policy, not bureaucrats.



I can tell that you don't live within the EU. I know that because you have no idea how it works. To say that unelected EU bureaucrats are not the ones who determine EU policy is about as far away from the truth as is possible to get.

The European Parliament is just one of THREE bodies which exercise the legislative function of the EU. The other two are the Council of the European Union and the European Commission.

It is the UNELECTED bureaucrats of the EU Commission who are responsible for proposing legislation, implementing decisions, upholding the Union's treaties and, in fact, the day-to-day running of the EU.

So all this EU legislation which is imposed upon Britain comes from the unelected EU Commissioners, not the European Parliament.
 
Blackleaf
#12
Trust the people to decide on Europe? Whatever next!

The public are perfectly capable of casting an informed vote – but Labour won’t let them



By London Mayor Boris Johnson
12 Jan 2014
The Telegraph


I don’t often get to read the entire transcript of debates in the House of Lords, but the other day I found myself mesmerised by the one on the EU referendum that was initiated last Friday by the thriller writer Michael Dobbs. I came to the juddering climax of the text, and put it down breathless and stunned – staring pop-eyed at the window as I grasped a new geopolitical reality. It is quite obvious that Labour is not going to give the public a vote on Europe. Miliband has plainly made up what passes for his mind.

The last doubt was removed in the course of the proceedings. Speaker after speaker stood up from the Labour side to protest at the very concept of this embarrassingly direct democracy. One by one their Labour lordships reminded each other of the wise words of Clement Attlee, that referendums were the devices of despots and dictators – and why? Because there was always the risk, don’t you know, that the poor benighted public would say or do the wrong thing.

Trust the people? Dear me, no, said the representatives of the so-called People’s Party. You couldn’t even trust the people to understand the question, let alone answer it, they said. These are difficult matters, they said, which are capable of being misrepresented by the Right-wing media. It is only we – the privileged oligarchic caste of experts – who are capable of adjudicating on issues like Europe, they said.

It was a positive orgy of nannying and finger-wagging, as if they were voting on the age limit at which children should be allowed to handle .22 air guns. The gist of the Labour view was that a referendum was a potentially lethal weapon, and that it was mad to place such a device in the hands of the dunderheaded British public.

I wonder whether they have any idea what has been happening in British politics over the past few years. It may have escaped the notice of the Labour Party, but there is a crisis of trust. Not since the beginning of the universal franchise have politicians generally been held in such low esteem. Political parties (with some exceptions, such as UKIP) are continuing to haemorrhage members; voters are declining in droves to go to the polls.

This issue – Europe – is one on which they would genuinely like a say. All the polls say so. The British have not been consulted on this vital constitutional matter since 1975 – whereas it has apparently been all right to submit similar questions to the Danes, the French, the Irish and plenty of others.



Is there some difference in the cognitive faculties of the British people? Is Labour saying we are incapable of getting to the heart of the matter, and of coming up with an answer that is in the long-term interests of this country? If this is the position – and I defy Ed Miliband to say it isn’t – then it is not only patronising and condescending to the electorate. It is boneheadedly stupid.

As even Lord Mandelson silkily accepted at the beginning of his speech, the EU is in need of reform. It is not just the euro that is a disaster area: one of the reasons that the EU is a global microclimate of relative gloom is the ceaseless production of regulation, over the past 50 years, that is now starting to make the whole continent uncompetitive. The entire enterprise needs to be shaken up, and Britain could lead that effort.

There is a new model to be offered, in which there is plenty of scope for idealism. We should be completing the internal market in services – opening up opportunities for everyone from lawyers to hairdressers to ski instructors. And we should be offering the European public things they actually want – like cheaper roaming costs for mobiles. We should zap so much of the bureaucratic malarkey that is holding European business back. We don’t need the CAP, we don’t need the social chapter, we don’t need the European Court adjudicating in home affairs.

In fact – as almost all politicians, including Nick Clegg, now seem to be saying – we need to recover some control over our borders, and we certainly need to be able to insist on longer derogations before migrants from EU accession countries are entitled to our benefits.

That is a completely reasonable request, and reflects the immense changes we have seen in the EU. When we joined the Common Market, it was a small and relatively economically homogeneous group of nine. There are now 28 countries and a combined population of about 500 million. There is an appetite for reform around the table in Brussels, and I bet there is more than one country that might want to join us in leading the charge.

Instead, the attitude of Labour is resolutely defeatist. Oh, they will never agree to that, say people like Mandelson. You’ll never get your way in the renegotiation, they say, so you might as well not bother.

Well, you certainly won’t get anything if you have Miliband in charge; and you won’t get anything if you have Cleggers in charge, either. But you certainly will get a change if you have David Cameron in charge. And there is one simple way to fortify his position, one gigantic bazooka he could bring into the conference chamber.

Our friends and partners in Brussels need to understand that they are not just negotiating with the namby-pamby elites of this country. In offering new terms of membership, they must understand that they are dealing with the people – the British electorate, cussed and suspicious, who will pronounce in a referendum.

As it happens, I think the people will suck their teeth hard, squint into the future, and go for the kind of prospectus now being offered by the think tank Open Europe – stay in the single market, but axe much of the rest. They will want the best of both worlds. If they can, I think people will vote for staying in – on the right terms. But Britain won’t be offered the right terms unless the people are given the chance to vote. Get the EU to stare down the barrel of a British referendum – or forget about any chance of reform.


Trust the people to decide on Europe? Whatever next! - Telegraph
 

Similar Threads

9
anyone remeber Lords of Flatbush
by Dreadful Nonsense | Jun 18th, 2007
6
Torture being debated
by Karlin | Oct 27th, 2005
no new posts