I am dealing with the constitutional implications of what the Foreign Secretary said. It is clear that in a range of matters in the construction of the treaty there is constitutional change of the first order between us and the EU. That is why a referendum is required. The Foreign Secretary used those criteria for a referendum in his argument. He said that if there were a structural change there ought to be a referendum, and, with respect Mrs. Heal, I am indicating that structural change is exactly what is happening in the treaty.
Part of the issue relates to why we should want a referendum. It is because the House should have the humility to decide that we want to give the decision back to the voters. Furthermore, as I said in an intervention on a Liberal Democrat Member yesterday, there would be no point in staying in if we did not have the right to legislate in line with the wishes of the voters of the UK as expressed in general elections. That is the basis of our legislative process. We give effect to the wishes of voters.
The plain fact is that unless we reassert the supremacy of our Parliament, as set out in my new clause 9, on which I expect us to be able to vote later, we would not be able to maintain our position in the EU. We must have a provision stating that notwithstanding the European Communities Act 1972, we will continue to legislate on behalf of the voters of the UK and that the courts must give effect to the provision in any later Act even if it is inconsistent with the provisions of European legislation. That is not withdrawal. Case law is clear: such a measure would not repeal all the treaties; it is about particular provisions. My party agreed on amendments to the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006, which was pushed through both Houses, and we should do so again today.
If the vote goes the wrong way, we need a post-ratification referendum, for the simple reason that the issues go to the very heart of the way our country is governed. We are elected to represent the interests of the people, and if we fall down we must give them the right to make their own decision in a referendum. That is why a referendum is required.
European Union (Amendment) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
William Cash
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 5 March 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on European Union (Amendment) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
472 c1854;472 c1852 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:24:47 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_452413
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_452413
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_452413