David Cameron FAILS to vote for his party's own proposal of a EU 'referendum lock'

You may or may not know this, but there was a debate and vote in the House of Commons last night on a Conservative proposal for David Cameron's much talked about EU 'referendum lock'.

The big news, straight up, is that David Cameron FAILED to turn up and vote for his own party's proposal to which Cameron had faced the TV cameras and gave the British people a second cast-iron guarantee of delivering... after breaking his party's first 'cast iron guarantee' of a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, no matter what.

The reason and explanation for Cameron's failure to vote for his party's own amendment, to Government legislation, creating a 'referendum lock' is irrelevant. The fact is that he failed to turn up to the House of Commons and vote for the amendment.

And neither did William Hague. Nor George Osborne, either.

This is, alas dear reader, a rather long post but we have picked out the really key bits from Hansard. The full debate is online.

These exchanges do not make the newspapers for some reason, but are of real importance in a democracy. These are the stated views of our elected representatives. This blogger accepts that the Hansard record may be too long and often too dull for the entirety of the British public to sit down and read. So, we've sat down and picked out some of the highlights and would encourage those who see our membership of the European Union as an important issue to make time to study the debate.

This is what was debated and voted upon:

New clause 68- Referendum on treaties which transfer competences to the EU

'(1) This section shall apply in the case of a treaty which transfers competences from the United Kingdom Parliament to the European Union.

(2) A referendum shall be held throughout the United Kingdom and Gibraltar on the day specified by a Minister of the Crown.

(3) The question to be asked in the referendum is whether the British people approve the ratification of the treaty, "Yes" or "No".

After twice being pushed by Lib Dem MPs (a bit rich that party should talk at all on this specific topic), Mark Francois promised the House:

"If we were not to succeed tonight, we would [...] then amend the law if we were to form an incoming Conservative Government. [...] By putting in this referendum lock, the amendment means that if ever there were a future treaty that transferred powers from Britain to the EU, there would have to be a referendum. [...] What the House will want to know this evening is whether the Labour party and the Liberal Democrats support a referendum lock, which is what we are proposing tonight. [...] We shall wait to see what Labour and the Liberal Democrats do in the Division Lobby. [...] The last major ratification of a European treaty was that of the Lisbon treaty. During debates on the treaty, Conservative Members of Parliament kept their manifesto promise and voted for a referendum. Unfortunately, with a few honourable exceptions, the Labour party and the Liberal Democrats did not.

My party believes that the British people should be given the last word on any future transfers of power from the UK to the EU, so I challenge the Labour party and the Liberal Democrats to have equal trust in the British people and to support this amendment tonight. Before they vote, I would also ask them to consider the following. If they vote against the amendment, they will be voting against giving the British people a say on any future handover of power to the EU and people will rightly ask why. Their most likely conclusion will be that Labour and the Liberal Democrats, once again, mean to sign new treaties handing powers over from Britain to the European Union without consulting the voters, as they have conspired to do in the past. If that is what they plan to do, we will be happy to inform voters of their intentions at the imminent general election.

[...] If the Liberal Democrats had kept to their manifesto promise, as we did, and had voted with us in the Lobby, there were enough Labour rebels to have delivered that referendum. The Liberal Democrats know what they did in abstaining on that point and in conspiring with the Government to prevent a referendum on Lisbon, so we shall take no lessons whatsoever from those on their Benches about desires for a referendum. Let me make that very clear."

There was an interesting introduction to the speech from Keith Vaz (Labour) who said:

"I would like to see more debates on the European Union and much more scrutiny of such issues on the Floor of the House of Commons. I would also like to ensure that the European Scrutiny Committee can bring its reports to the Floor of the House on its own motion, allowing Members of the House to discuss the facts, as opposed to the myths, about the European Union.

I have some sympathy with the remarks of the shadow Minister for Europe [Francois], but we need clarity about what he means in respect of the transfer of powers. There is a consensus among all the parties in the House that we are better off in the European Union than outside it. I am not sure whether that applies to the hon. Member for Stone (Mr. Cash), but the Front-Bench teams of all political parties are united in the belief that the future of this country remains within the European Union.

[...] We need to determine the circumstances in which a competent authority can say that powers have been transferred. For various reasons, party political points will always be made when we discuss Europe. I agree that there are divisions in all the major political parties. I am not sure that there are any divisions in the Liberal Democrat party on Europe, but there certainly are in the Labour party. There is a small minority in the Labour party who believe that we should not be in Europe at all, and I think that applies to the Conservative party as well.

[...] I believe that the Conservative party is signed up to the concept of Europe, but of course its members have to oppose everything that the Government propose in that regard. [...] Should there be a Conservative victory at the next general election, there is no prospect that a Conservative leader and Cabinet will say that Britain should come out of the EU.

[...] I believe that it would be a good idea for us to hold one referendum on the question of this country's membership of the EU. We should put the matter to the people once and for all. We have been in the EU for three decades, but let us just put the question to the people so that they can decide whether we should stay in or come out."

When Vaz raised the issue of Maastricht, the ever impressive Bill Cash (Conservative) rose to say:

"I instigated the Maastricht referendum campaign, which got more than 500,000 signatures on the petition to Parliament for such a referendum. Of course I believe that there should have been one. The Conservative party, apart from three Members, was united on the entire Lisbon treaty. As a consolidating treaty, that is more important than Maastricht because it takes the process of integration, plus primacy, so much further. It is a lethal treaty and should have been subject to a referendum. It is a disgrace that the Government did not hold one."

Setting out the LibDem position, Ed Davey stated:

"[...] [W]e will not be supporting his amendments tonight. We will be voting against them, and I shall explain why. Liberal Democrats support a referendum on Europe, but on Britain's membership of the EU and not on the legalese of any specific treaty. We believe that the British people want to be able to answer the in-out question, and that that is the sort of constitutional issue that is best put in a referendum. [...] Another reason is that we think it is fatally flawed. As far as we can see, it would require a referendum on the transfer of any competence, however minor. That could lead to referendums on issues of policy that are relatively minor and which certainly have no real constitutional significance. That surely is an unsustainable position. [...] Neither can I believe that, in government, the Conservatives really would honour the amendment to the letter, because it is so fatally flawed. [...] I remind him and the House that the Conservatives voted against the Liberal Democrat proposal on 14 November 2007 for a referendum on Britain's membership of the European Union. What is worse, they worked with the Labour party to stop this House even debating the proposition on 4 March 2008 about whether we should have a referendum on the in-out question. He says that he will not take lectures from us; likewise, I repeat that remark to him.

The Conservatives' voting record on referendums in this Parliament does not bear scrutiny. Their record on referendums in government is worth recalling, too, as the right hon. Member for Leicester, East (Keith Vaz) said. Did they offer a referendum on the single European treaty or Maastricht? No. The Liberal Democrats joined forces with the hon. Member for Stone (Mr. Cash) and argued for a referendum on the Maastricht treaty, because it really was of constitutional significance and it deserved a referendum.

[...] [W]e believe that there should be a referendum on the future of Britain's membership. There have been so many treaties over the past 20 years, as the right hon. Member for Leicester, East reminded us, and the British people have not had a referendum on any of them. It is therefore time to ask people the real question - the one that people say they want - about whether Britain should be a member of the European Union. That is the question people want to be asked, not a question about detailed aspects of a treaty."

Denis MacShane (Labour and former Europe minister) argued:

"The amendment is an invitation to make good the lost honour of the Leader of the Opposition [David Cameron], who said beyond peradventure to his party that there would be a referendum on the Lisbon treaty - he offered it a cast-iron pledge, or girdle, and an ultimate guarantee - and then reneged on it."

There was a wonderful intervention from the ever-dependable Statesman Richard Shepherd (Conservative):

"In the right hon. Gentleman's defence of the sovereignty of Parliament, does he not recognise that if Parliament becomes so disconnected from those who send us here, its sovereignty, which has been a bastion of our liberal interpretation of our liberty, in fact becomes the greatest tyranny, and that what this House imposes without reference to the public disconnects it from the public, and undermines the very constitutional search that we have undergone to become a free and democratic people?"

Geoffrey Cox (Conservative) made some strong points in a speech that was often brilliant and seriously enlightening for those not engaged in politic-speak:

"What conceivable objection can there be to offering the people of this country the opportunity to be consulted directly through their vote on a treaty that transfers substantial powers to the European Union? [...] If [the Liberal Democrats] genuinely believe in consultative democracy for the people we represent, and if they really think that a referendum on European treaties would be a good thing, they should be tabling their own amendments and walking through the Lobby in support of the Conservative party.

Instead, however, the Liberal Democrats have produced a position that they believe will please an electorate to whom they have to appeal, as they so often do. They know that the electorate to whom they have to appeal throughout the south-west - and in the constituency that I have the honour to represent - are profoundly Eurosceptic. Through the smokescreen of a generalised referendum on membership of the European Union, they hope to persuade those Eurosceptic people, who have otherwise broadly liberal tendencies, that they can offer them one thing while doing another. That is discreditable and cynical, but the reality is that it is what we have come to expect from that party.

Let us concentrate on this measure. What conceivable objection could there be to providing the people of this country with a say on a treaty that transfers power to the European Union? Let us examine the objections that have been made here this afternoon. The right hon. Member for Leicester, East (Keith Vaz), who has just returned to his place, contended that this would result in multiple referendums. Yes, every few years, if there were additional treaties that transferred substantial powers, the people of this country would be offered the opportunity of a consultation. What is wrong with that?

[...] The measure would not result in multiple referendums. There would be a referendum every few years, and perhaps that would induce genuine caution in the politicians of the European Union before they created more treaties that transferred endless new powers and competences to distant institutions with which the people of this country feel no direct democratic connection. Perhaps those referendums would induce a welcome caution, as the peoples of the European Union-and specifically the British people-were offered the opportunity of a consultation and given their say. Perhaps they would provide a salutary lesson on introducing treaty after treaty while the people of this country-passive spectators-have to watch while the likes of the right hon. Member for Rotherham (Mr. MacShane) play games with, and make party political points about, the powers, privileges and inherent rights of Parliament.

There was a piquant and poignant irony, I say to the Committee, in the position of the right hon. Gentleman. I have to say that it was an extraordinary spectacle to observe him defend parliamentary supremacy so that he could the more easier give it up; and to defend parliamentary sovereignty so that he did not have to submit the consistent surrender of the powers of this House to the people of this country. What an extraordinary irony, if there is anybody watching at this late hour, would be created in the minds of the interested spectator at the thought of the right hon. Gentleman standing up for the rights of Parliament and standing up for the sovereignty of Parliament-he, a member of a Government who have consistently undermined, corroded and eroded it for the last 12 years; a member of a Government who have consistently treated Parliament with disdain, contempt and scorn since the moment they came into power on a benighted day in May 1997. Let me say to the Committee that no more amusing, ironic and exquisite moment have I experienced in my short time here than in hearing the speeches of the right hon. Gentleman in defence of parliamentary sovereignty.

[...] Over the past 12 months it might have dawned on us, and the penny might have dropped, that the people of this country have stopped trusting us. They do not trust us any more in this House. They do not think that we stand up and defend the prerogatives of this House as we ought, and so the time has come when they are demanding a direct consultation on the surrender of the prerogatives and rights of this House.

[...] [T]he time has come for this House to have the humility to accept that it is the people of this country who should decide in future on whether further powers are transferred to a European Union, in which they do not possess confidence, and in whose democratic credentials they have no faith."

For the Government, Chris Bryant raged thus:

"[...] The trouble is that there is no principle to the Conservatives' position; if there is, it is one of swivel-eyed, obsessive Pavlovian, dogmatic and fundamentalist objection to anything that even mentions the European Union."

Philip Davies (Conservative) asked whether:

"[...] Labour Members are so wound up in their opposition to [the Conservative] proposal because on these matters they are petrified of the verdict of the British people?"

Mark Francois then had harsh words for the Liberal Democrats, saying:

"[...] Let me summarise their position throughout the whole Lisbon process. When we debated it in this House, the Liberals argued again and again that they wanted an in-out referendum on membership of the European Union. They organised a contrived sixth-form walk-out to try to get a vote on that matter, and then when it actually came to the vote on whether we should have a referendum on the Lisbon treaty, which they had promised in their manifesto, they abstained.

Moving on to the other place, the saga continued. We should bear it in mind that the Liberals had abstained on a referendum on Lisbon in this House, despite their manifesto promise. When it fell to their peers to echo the work of their colleagues in this House and they had a vote on a referendum on Lisbon, they voted against it. They then had an opportunity to vote on an amendment on whether to have an in-out referendum, which the Liberal Democrats in this House had spent weeks and weeks trying every possible device in the depths of "Erskine May" to bring about a vote on. They had been desperate in the Commons to have a vote on an in-out referendum, but when the issue got to the Lords they voted against it. And yet the hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton has the brass neck to come to the House this evening and say that we are unclear and inconsistent. What a remarkable way to conduct parliamentary debate. The Liberal Democrats have been completely inconsistent, and I reiterate that if they had supported us at the time of the debates on the Lisbon treaty, there were enough potential Labour rebels to give the people of this country the referendum that they had been promised all along. We know it, he knows it, his colleagues behind him know it and the Government know it too. I say to him, please do not ever come back here and lecture us on votes on a referendum."

To end, Mark Francois stated:

"I hope that even at the last minute, the Government and the Liberals might decide to join us in the Lobby to help to put right at least part of the damage that was done to public trust by the Lisbon treaty process. We have to acknowledge that that took place and that we are not having this debate in a vacuum. I reiterate that if the Government and the Liberal Democrats seek in a few minutes to deny the British people their say on any future treaties that transfer power from Britain to the EU, in response we will ask the British people for a mandate at the forthcoming general election to pass such a referendum lock into the law of this country. I hope that they will yet recant and support us, but we need now to test the will of the House. If that does not work because of Labour and the Liberals, we will test the will of the British people instead."

The Conservative proposal was defeated.

A couple of notes on how MPs voted.

For Labour, Kate Hoey - as ever - honoured her manifesto commitment to her constituents and voted for the Conservative proposal. Ms. Hoey can continue to hold her head high and she will not encounter any criticism from this blogger.

The same can be said for Jeremy Corbyn and Frank Field.

On the Lib Dem benches, Lembit Öpik supported the Conservative proposal.

Apologies to any other member of Labour, the Liberal Democrats, national or independent MPs who walked through the 'aye' lobby and whose names this blogger has not highlighted.

To be totally balanced, we will point out again that David Cameron FAILED to vote with the Conservative Party on this issue.

And here are the names of all those Members of Parliament who voted 'no' - you may want to question them about this if they are your MP, prior to the General Election:

NOES

Abbott, Ms Diane
Ainger, Nick
Ainsworth, rh Mr. Bob
Alexander, Danny
Allen, Mr. Graham
Anderson, Mr. David
Armstrong, rh Hilary
Atkins, Charlotte
Austin, Mr. Ian
Austin, John
Bailey, Mr. Adrian
Bain, Mr. William
Baird, Vera
Balls, rh Ed
Banks, Gordon
Barlow, Ms Celia
Barrett, John
Barron, rh Mr. Kevin
Battle, rh John
Bayley, Hugh
Beckett, rh Margaret
Begg, Miss Anne
Beith, rh Sir Alan
Bell, Sir Stuart
Benn, rh Hilary
Benton, Mr. Joe
Berry, Roger
Betts, Mr. Clive
Blackman, Liz
Blackman-Woods, Dr. Roberta
Blears, rh Hazel
Blizzard, Mr. Bob
Blunkett, rh Mr. David
Borrow, Mr. David S.
Brake, Tom
Breed, Mr. Colin
Brennan, Kevin
Brown, Lyn
Brown, rh Mr. Nicholas
Brown, Mr. Russell
Browne, rh Des
Bruce, rh Malcolm
Bryant, Chris
Buck, Ms Karen
Burden, Richard
Burnham, rh Andy
Burstow, Mr. Paul
Butler, Ms Dawn
Byrne, rh Mr. Liam
Caborn, rh Mr. Richard
Cairns, David
Campbell, Mr. Alan
Campbell, rh Sir Menzies
Caton, Mr. Martin
Challen, Colin
Chapman, Ben
Chaytor, Mr. David
Clapham, Mr. Michael
Clark, Ms Katy
Clarke, rh Mr. Tom
Clelland, Mr. David
Clwyd, rh Ann
Coaker, Mr. Vernon
Coffey, Ann
Connarty, Michael
Cook, Frank
Cooper, Rosie
Cooper, rh Yvette
Cousins, Jim
Crausby, Mr. David
Creagh, Mary
Cryer, Mrs. Ann
Cummings, John
Cunningham, Mr. Jim
Cunningham, Tony
Davey, Mr. Edward
David, Mr. Wayne
Davidson, Mr. Ian
Davies, Mr. Quentin
Dean, Mrs. Janet
Denham, rh Mr. John
Dhanda, Mr. Parmjit
Dismore, Mr. Andrew
Dobbin, Jim
Donohoe, Mr. Brian H.
Doran, Mr. Frank
Dowd, Jim
Eagle, Angela
Eagle, Maria
Efford, Clive
Ellman, Mrs. Louise
Engel, Natascha
Ennis, Jeff
Featherstone, Lynne
Fisher, Mark
Flello, Mr. Robert
Flint, rh Caroline
Flynn, Paul
Follett, Barbara
Foster, Mr. Don
Foster, Mr. Michael (Worcester)
Foster, Michael Jabez (Hastings and Rye)
Francis, Dr. Hywel
Gardiner, Barry
George, rh Mr. Bruce
Gerrard, Mr. Neil
Goggins, rh Paul
Goodman, Helen
Griffith, Nia
Griffiths, Nigel

Grogan, Mr. John
Hain, rh Mr. Peter
Hall, Patrick
Hanson, rh Mr. David
Harris, Dr. Evan
Harris, Mr. Tom
Healey, rh John
Hendrick, Mr. Mark
Hepburn, Mr. Stephen
Heppell, Mr. John
Hesford, Stephen
Heyes, David
Hodge, rh Margaret
Hood, Mr. Jim
Hope, Phil
Horwood, Martin
Howarth, David
Howarth, rh Mr. George
Howells, rh Dr. Kim
Hughes, Simon
Huhne, Chris
Humble, Mrs. Joan
Hutton, rh Mr. John
Iddon, Dr. Brian
Irranca-Davies, Huw
Jackson, Glenda
James, Mrs. Siân C.
Jenkins, Mr. Brian
Johnson, rh Alan
Johnson, Ms Diana R.
Jones, Helen
Jones, Mr. Kevan
Jones, Lynne
Jones, Mr. Martyn
Jowell, rh Tessa
Joyce, Mr. Eric
Kaufman, rh Sir Gerald
Keeble, Ms Sally
Keeley, Barbara
Keen, Alan
Keen, Ann
Kemp, Mr. Fraser
Kennedy, rh Mr. Charles
Kidney, Mr. David
Kilfoyle, Mr. Peter
Knight, rh Jim
Kramer, Susan
Kumar, Dr. Ashok
Ladyman, Dr. Stephen
Lammy, rh Mr. David
Laxton, Mr. Bob
Lazarowicz, Mark
Lepper, David
Levitt, Tom
Lloyd, Tony
Love, Mr. Andrew
Lucas, Ian
MacShane, rh Mr. Denis
Mactaggart, Fiona
Mallaber, Judy
Mann, John
Marris, Rob
Marsden, Mr. Gordon
Martlew, Mr. Eric
McAvoy, rh Mr. Thomas
McCafferty, Chris
McCarthy, Kerry
McCarthy-Fry, Sarah
McDonagh, Siobhain
McFadden, rh Mr. Pat
McFall, rh John
McGovern, Mr. Jim
McGrady, Mr. Eddie
McGuire, rh Mrs. Anne
McIsaac, Shona
McKechin, Ann
McKenna, Rosemary
McNulty, rh Mr. Tony
Meacher, rh Mr. Michael
Merron, Gillian
Miliband, rh Edward
Miller, Andrew
Moffatt, Laura
Mole, Chris
Moore, Mr. Michael
Morden, Jessica
Morgan, Julie
Morley, rh Mr. Elliot
Mudie, Mr. George
Mullin, Mr. Chris
Munn, Meg
Murphy, Mr. Denis
Murphy, rh Mr. Jim
Murphy, rh Mr. Paul
Naysmith, Dr. Doug
O'Brien, rh Mr. Mike
O'Hara, Mr. Edward
Olner, Mr. Bill
Owen, Albert
Palmer, Dr. Nick
Pearson, Ian
Plaskitt, Mr. James
Pound, Stephen
Prentice, Bridget
Prentice, Mr. Gordon
Prescott, rh Mr. John
Primarolo, rh Dawn
Prosser, Gwyn
Purnell, rh James
Rammell, Bill
Raynsford, rh Mr. Nick
Reed, Mr. Andy
Reid, Mr. Alan
Reid, rh John
Rennie, Willie
Riordan, Mrs. Linda
Robertson, John
Robinson, Mr. Geoffrey
Rooney, Mr. Terry
Rowen, Paul
Roy, Mr. Frank
Roy, Lindsay
Ruane, Chris
Ruddock, Joan
Russell, Bob
Ryan, rh Joan
Salter, Martin
Sanders, Mr. Adrian
Seabeck, Alison
Sharma, Mr. Virendra
Shaw, Jonathan
Sheerman, Mr. Barry
Sheridan, Jim
Simon, Mr. Siôn
Skinner, Mr. Dennis
Slaughter, Mr. Andy
Smith, rh Mr. Andrew
Smith, Ms Angela C. (Sheffield, Hillsborough)
Smith, rh Angela E. (Basildon)
Smith, Geraldine
Smith, rh Jacqui
Smith, Sir Robert
Snelgrove, Anne

Soulsby, Sir Peter
Southworth, Helen
Spellar, rh Mr. John
Starkey, Dr. Phyllis
Stewart, Ian
Stoate, Dr. Howard
Strang, rh Dr. Gavin
Straw, rh Mr. Jack
Stringer, Graham
Stunell, Andrew
Sutcliffe, Mr. Gerry
Swinson, Jo
Tami, Mark
Teather, Sarah
Thomas, Mr. Gareth
Thornberry, Emily
Thurso, John
Timms, rh Mr. Stephen
Tipping, Paddy
Todd, Mr. Mark
Touhig, rh Mr. Don
Trickett, Jon
Turner, Dr. Desmond
Turner, Mr. Neil
Twigg, Derek
Walley, Joan
Waltho, Lynda
Ward, Claire
Watson, Mr. Tom
Watts, Mr. Dave
Webb, Steve
Whitehead, Dr. Alan
Wicks, rh Malcolm
Williams, rh Mr. Alan
Williams, Mrs. Betty
Williams, Mark
Williams, Mr. Roger
Williams, Stephen
Willis, Mr. Phil
Willott, Jenny
Wills, rh Mr. Michael
Wilson, Phil
Winnick, Mr. David
Winterton, rh Ms Rosie
Woolas, Mr. Phil
Wright, Mr. Anthony
Wright, David
Wright, Mr. Iain
Wright, Dr. Tony
Wyatt, Derek

To see the full list of 'aye' and 'no' votes, click here for the relevant page of Hansard.