European Union (Amendment) Bill

I am not going to take any interventions, because I know that many Members wish to speak. Let me make a simple point. In April 2004 the then Prime Minister and leader of my party, Tony Blair, announced that the EU constitution would be put to a referendum. He said:"““Let the people have the final say by way of a referendum… if we are to make the case… we will have to make it to the British people.””" The Prime Minister was emphatic:"““There is no question of any constitutional treaty going through without the express consent of the British people… we will have a referendum.””" He went further, and said something that has not been mentioned so far today:"““What you cannot do is… get a rejection of the treaty and bring it back with a few amendments and say, ‘Have another go.’ You cannot do that. If the people vote no, they vote no””." The problem is that we have ended up with a situation in which the treaty has been brought back. The most honest Member in the House today—I am not saying that everyone else has not been honest, Mrs. Heal, because I know that we are all honest here—was the right hon. and learned Member for Rushcliffe (Mr. Clarke). He said clearly and specifically as a pro-European that in his view there is no difference between the constitution and the treaty. He happens to be my constituent when he is in London, so I do not want to disagree with him when he says something like that. For me, he has summed the whole thing up. The right hon. and learned Gentleman may be in a different party from me, but he has been so pro-European and so committed in principle to his opposition to a referendum—he has not shifted back and forth depending on whether his party leadership changed its view—that I am with him on that point. No matter what is said here today, no matter how many fine words are uttered and no matter how great the detail, the vast majority of the public know that what we are voting for in the treaty is exactly the same, and has the same intent, as the constitution on which the Prime Minister promised a referendum—a promise that was included in our manifesto. For me, this is about honesty in politics. It is about saying what you mean and then doing what you mean. We all have a responsibility to what we said in that manifesto, and we all have a responsibility to recognise the consequences if we do not support a referendum tonight. I hope that some of my colleagues have been influenced by the many good speeches today in favour of a referendum, but the matter is not over yet, because if we do not secure a vote tonight, it will go to the House of Lords. Do we really want to run the risk of the unelected House of Lords sending back measures that we have refused to agree to because we, as elected politicians, do not want to go along with our manifesto commitments? That would be ridiculous, and it would show what a farce the whole situation has become. We have an opportunity tonight to put a little faith and trust back in politics and politicians. The public are so cynical about us as individuals, although not necessarily in all constituencies, and the overall political system. The big gap that now exists between Parliament and the people out in the country will be made even bigger if we all troop into the Lobby and vote against a referendum—I hope that will not happen. I will certainly stick to my manifesto commitment and to my personal commitment—I specifically said in my election address that I supported a referendum. I hope that many of my colleagues will join me tonight.