UK Parliament / Open data

European Union Bill

Although one can never guarantee against the utterly implausible happening, the scenario that my hon. Friend describes would require a commitment of political energy on the part of every EU member state, because the decisions subject to a referendum require unanimity among member state Governments. Furthermore, he assumes that the UK Government of the time would be prepared to accept and recommend to the people three different treaty changes, or the implementation of three different passerelle clauses, or some combination of those on a single occasion. That is unlikely in the extreme. A more plausible scenario—although I do not think, from talking to my colleagues on the Council of Ministers, that people have any appetite for this at the moment—if European countries wanted an ambitious treaty change covering a number of different competencies, would be to seek treaty amendment through the ordinary revision procedure. That is the instrument available to the EU for an ambitious, wide-ranging treaty change along the pattern of Lisbon, Nice, Amsterdam and Maastricht. In those circumstances, the total proposal for a treaty amendment—regardless of which city it was named after—would be the subject of a single referendum question. It is most unlikely, therefore, that there would be a multiplicity of narrowly focused referendum questions, given the availability of that instrument.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

522 c257-8 

Session

2010-12

Chamber / Committee

House of Commons chamber
Back to top