European Union (Amendment) Bill

The Minister has informed me from a sedentary position that the new Government of Cyprus, who are communist, are actually supporting the treaty. I did not intend to do a disservice to them, so I am grateful to the Minister for that. In examining the difference in the constitutional nature of the two treaties, I have been taking advice from the speeches of the right hon. Member for Richmond, Yorks. Back in 2006, he made a very interesting comment on the nature of European treaties. He said of the defunct constitutional treaty that"““the fact that it was a Constitution, not simply a treaty, would have revolutionised the EU.””" There we have it—a revolutionary document, or a simple treaty? Referendums are the democratic way—[Interruption.] Revolutions are important in our government, and I would suggest that referendums are the democratic way to judge constitutional revolutions, but they are absolutely not the way to referee institutional reforms. That is why we Liberal Democrats believe that the only way to honour the pledge on Europe that most Members of this House gave at the last election is an in-out referendum. We heard yesterday, and we have heard today, accusations that people think that this is some sort of ruse—that somehow, we have made it up, that we imagined it all of a sudden. Let me take the House back to the history of the pledge that we made. My right hon. Friend the Member for Ross, Skye and Lochaber (Mr. Kennedy), the then leader of the Liberal Democrats, explained before the general election what we considered our pledge to mean. When arguing the case for a referendum on the constitutional treaty, he said:"““It’s time for this debate—time for us to decide what we actually want from Europe. I believe, once the argument has been joined, the consensus will be that it’s better to be in than out.””" He was right; that was the significance of our referendum pledge on the constitutional treaty.