I have seen some consternation amongst Lib Dems today, both in real life and online, about Nick Clegg’s remarks about an EU referendum not being a red line for us. Many party members feel very strongly that we should not agree to something which could be very unsettling and destabilising. Having come through three years of the Scottish referendum, I am more in that camp than in the other group of activists who think we should agree to it or we’ll be seen as anti-democratic.
Before we rush to judgment, let’s have a look at what Nick actually said. From the Guardian:
I am happy to insist on my red lines – they are the ones the Liberal Democratshave put on the front page of our manifesto which are much more important than some of the other red lines other parties have chosen.”
He said he disagreed with the Tory position on the EU and said he was still committed to the act of parliament passed by the coalition which would trigger a referendum if further UK sovereignty was ceded to Brussels. But he declined to rule out rejecting Cameron’s demand for a referendum.
“It’s not my responsibility to try and stare into a crystal ball. The way this works is I set out my priorities, David Cameron sets out his, Ed Miliband sets out his. People then choose. How those red lines are or are not compatible with each other is in part dependent on the mandate that the British people give each of those parties.”
At no point does he say that we will agree to an EU referendum. It’s a red line for Cameron, but would he seriously walk away from a coalition deal over it? Would we walk away from a deal that gave us all our red lines if we agreed to this? Here are three reasons why Nick’s comments don’t worry me.
We should not make red lines on anyone else’s issues, only on our values
Our red lines reflect our values – giving the NHS the money it needs and prioritising the NHS to give everyone the chance to get on in life, environmental sustainability, financial responsibility, education so that nobody is enslaved by ignorance, fair taxation and fair pay for public servants.
I am not over keen on the “balancing the books” red line and I’m not so sure that taking an extra few years to do it constitutes that much of a lurch to the left but it’s a key tenet of our values that we are careful with our resources, whether that be the planet or our money. We’ve always talked about sustainability and not being reckless with things.
Our red lines are about who we are and what we have to offer. As I’ve said before, we have to get them absolutely in full or walk away from government. Our credibility depends on it.
The deal is not in the gift of Nick or the leadership
So, the negotiating team come out and say that we can’t get them to budge on the EU referendum. At that point the parliamentary party decides whether to walk away from the deal or not. If they decided to stick with it, they would have to get it through with a two thirds majority at a special conference, as I set out last week. Then we could have the debate.
Ruling out a referendum before polling day is not a smart move
In 2007, the Liberal Democrats very proactively ruled out agreeing to a referendum on independence during the Scottish Parliament elections. That, and a policy plan for lots of PE for primary school kids was the only media coverage we got for what was, if you read it, a pretty radical and forward thinking manifesto. I think we could have negotiated a reasonable coalition deal with the SNP then if we hadn’t been quite so dogmatic about it. I doubt we’d actually have had the referendum then and I don’t think it would have been agreed in negotiations.
What we can do, though, is tell the Tories that they have no mandate for a referendum. They have a third of the vote and a majority all MPs are against. The Tories may well cave if they want to stay in power although that may not end well for them because their own right-wingers would erupt in horror. That’s their problem, though, not ours.
I am not perturbed in the least by Nick’s comments. We need to keep this on our ground, not anybody else’s.
* Caron Lindsay is Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings. You can find her on Bluesky at caronmlindsay.bsky.social
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The Joy of Six 1533
Have resignations led to a rethink?
High Fell leaflet watch (2)
Two new Makerfield by-election polls gives Burnham 5 and 12 point leads
Peter Martin
Meg Thomas
David Garlick
Paul Fox
70 Comments
Caron? I thought Nick favoured an in/out referendum and that this was always lib den policy?
Only if there is treaty change. Not just because.
Actually, we do have the opportunity, if there has to be a referendum, to influence it for the better – no 2 year renegotiation process for Cameron to sell our hard bought rights down the river, for example.
I’m willing to accept a coalition with Labour or the Conservatives, but if people try to throw a wrecking ball into a potential deal with the Conservatives before negotiations have even begun then it just encourages wrecking balls in the other direction.
Wouldn’t TTIP count as more powers being handed over to the EU, via the harmonisation committees and ISDS tribunals?
What really matters here is…. are the Liberal Democrats willing to go into coalition with the Tories a second time?
If the answer is no, then this problem goes away completely. Even with the Lib Dems adhering to the Cons, I calculate Labour + SNP + SDLP will be around 325 to Tory + Lib Dem + DUP + UKIP on around 315, but again if the Lib Dems would hold firm to what they claim to believe in, there wouldn’t be a problem
Will the Lib Dems prop up a Tory government that would take us out of Europe and destroy the union (as Scotland would then exit the UK)? Would they go into coalition with the homophobic DUP? The latter prospect in particular makes a bit of a mockery of the sanctimony over working with the SNP
Mr Wallace
No, the current party policy is absurd.
If there is a treaty change or anything else that requires a referendum, you can only vote on an in/out of the EU basis and not on the merits of the particular treaty change.
Gives a whole new meaning to the word liberal..
I agree with Caron that if the MPs do agree to a coalition deal that includes an EU referendum then it will be up to our special conference to reject it. I am thinking about emailing (after the general election) the members of the Federal Executive elected by Federal Conference that gave their email addresses not to agree to an EU referendum. In would then be up to David Cameron to decide if he could be PM with the Lib Dems committed to vote against an EU referendum and see if he could get support from other parties for it (e.g. the SNP might support it, if an independence referendum were linked to England voting to leave and Scotland voting to stay).
@ Mr Wallace
“I thought Nick favoured an in/out referendum and that this was always lib den policy”
I think when Charles Kennedy was leader our policy was not to support an in/out referendum and for there to be a referendum only to accept or reject any treaty changes. I think the MPs changed the policy under Ming Campbell and then got conference to agree it.
Nick Clegg’s authority to make up “red lines” on behalf of the Party is very questionable. Given that the odds of him remaining in Parliament after May 7 are little better than even, they also more than a bit smack of bravado.
@ David-1
Most of the red lines are the things on the front page of the manifesto and these were agreed by our Federal Policy Committee. The one about increasing wages for public sector workers is much less defensible (I don’t remember reading it in the manifesto, but it must be there somewhere), but I am not sure our members would say it is a bad policy.
Why the hell are we getting sucked into this whole silly game of drawing ‘red lines’ in the first place. All this sort of talk does is make the forming of any coalition (or confidence and supply arrangement) more difficult.
It also reinforces the image that Liberal Democrats see themselves as some sort of centrits ‘pivot party’ with no political aims and values of its own beyond a wish to ride in Minsiterial Cars.
We have a Manifesto which isn’t bad, so why is the national election campaign so damn dire?
And why is nobody asking the obvious question about an EU referendum. If Britain holds one, what is to stop 27 other nationa also wanting to “renegotiate terms and put the to the people in a referendum?” That would be a recipe for years and years of inertia, and as the most pro-European party we should be saying so. Cameron’s rhetoric on this is based on the old Imperial notion that the UK is in some way superior to ‘johnny foreigner and the Continentals.’ Why don’t we as the decendents of the Liberal Party that suporrted the UK signing the Treaty of Rome from the start expose the basic idiocy of Cameron’s attempt to pull off a Wilson 1975 style fudge to keep his fractious party together?
It’s all quite simple. If we leave the EU then we offer businesses sweeteners to make up for it. No need to panic.
PS, the cost of the sweeteners should form a major part of the IN campaign. Unnecessary panicking won’t do anyone any good. I would likely join the IN campaign straight away.
The British people (and the Liberal Democrats) have endured much hardship as a result of the belt-tightening required to reduce the gap between what the government raises in taxation and what it spends.
A two year period of uncertainty leading up to a second referendum on EU membership would inevitably reduce the amount of inward investment in Britain and worsen our economic position. Agreeing to a referendum would be like throwing away the hard won economic gains of the last five years.
If the Tories want to stall Britain’s economic recovery let them do so alone (or with UKIP) let us have no part of it.
Steve Comer: Well said! I agree entirely that all these “red lines” are just a sideshow and a vain attempt to restore trust in the Party (and, in particular, its leadership) which has simply gone for good (especially among younger (<30) voters). Some Radio Four comedy programme was dealing with the "Question Time" programme and referred to the third speaker as "Mr Tuition Fees". We need a completely new beginning and pro-Europeanism should be at the heart of the new party (in my view. If it is not, then I do not want to stay (having been induced to rejoin by the "IN campaign")).
In terms of the "bigger picture" of Europe as a whole, I think a UK withdrawal would be disastrous not just for the UK (both in economic terms and in terms of rapidly turning us into a narrow-minded, inward-looking, suspicious nation (or, rather, what would be left of it after Cameron and his swivel-eyed brigade had finally managed to help the SNP achieve their goal) which, like a sick old person, fears any change or alteration with the utmost trepidation and detests (like the 11 year old school pupil Tristan Hunt spoke to) anyone who represents "them", but for the continent as whole. Grexit seems about as certain as anything can be. Scottish independence would no doubt be very warmly welcomed in Catalonia and Northern Italy, while a UK withdrawal would be seized upon with huge gratitude by Le Pen and her followers as a model to emulate. As the departing EU President said, that (any prospect of French withdrawal) would (unlike a UK withdrawal) be the death-knell for the whole project and could well be the note for the end of the Euro as a project as well. As always since 1871 (with some gaps), the real focus would then again be east of the Rhine as, with the USA in retreat across the Pacific, which other nation than Germany would be capable of having to guarantee the Scandinavian, Baltic and eastern European nations against an ever more desperate and aggressive Russia (and in the process probably creating an alternative eurozone/economic union?) Such developments would leave the UK in precisely the position it has occupied with regard to developments in the Ukraine – a complete irrelevance and fulfill the nightmare of German foreign and defence policy strategists as finally burying for good the basic principles Adenauer laid down in the 1950s.
Steve Comer 4th May ’15 – 1:42am
I agree with what you say, Steve. This Westminster game-playing is madness whilst the country sleep-walks to the self-destruct of leaving the EU under the guidance of Mr Murdoch and other media moguls.
I would argue that red lines are all pointless for four reasons, they dont get us more votes, they limit our ability to negotiate post election, they damage us when we cant stick to them and they distort our offering to the voting public.
I cant prove the first point as noone has afaik had the balls to stand up and say “red lines are gimmicks”. The second point is self evident. EU membership is a key differentiator for us. But we cant say this or have a red line connected to it, because that would limit our ability to negotiate with two bigger parties who are more split on the EU. So even by not having a red line we are slapping ourselves in the face. In terms of damaging us – see tuition fees pledges for us and no top down NHS reorganisations for the Tories and us together. If Labour had a decent leader they would walk this general election just on those two issues alone. Trust! So, distorting our offering to the voting public… well we need to offer a positive picture of what we stand for. Red lines dont achieve that, typically they are negative. This election and any subsequent negotiation is a boxing match. Noone ever walked into a boxing match having drawn red lines on themselves saying “hit me here”. Still, as a Lib Dem there is one thing to celebrate today. At least we havent created and posed in front of an 8 ft tombstone.
What Richard wrote. Just say ‘No’. Then it won’t happen. Full stop. No one is predicting that ‘on this issue’ Lab + Lib Dems + SNP wont be fewer than Ts + UKIP.
Steve writes “It also reinforces the image that Liberal Democrats see themselves as some sort of centrits ‘pivot party’ ” but then that has been the central plank of our campaign since day one and everything else has been constructed around that’offer’.
And obviously he is right to worry that “with no political aims and values of its own beyond a wish to ride in Minsiterial Cars.”
Hence “stuck at 8% in the middle with you”.
Perhpas that double negative is working right!!!! but I hope people will understand the numbers.
Needless to say, I too agree with Steve Comer (and with additional comments by Richard, Charles, John, Alistair and Bill). We are THE internationalist party. The EU clearly has areas requiring reform but that is an entirely different agenda to that being constantly pushed in this and other areas by ‘Murdoch and other media moguls’ as mentioned by John Tilley.
Who gets to attend this Special Conference?
How are they mandated to vote at it?
How do we know they are representative of membership opinion?
These are important questions – any deal could be approved or rejected by a self-selecting group who have the time and money to attend this conference at short notice.
We know that anti-coalition activists will be more likely to attend because the rejectionists have 5 years of stored up resentment to motivate them, as we see on this board.
It seems clear that any Special Conference, whilst giving the appearance of being democratic, is likely to be the complete opposite for the reasons stated.
Only a full secret membership ballot will give us a fair view of membership opinion and anything else will be open to manipulation by a militant cabal.
I think it sad that Nick Clegg does little towards the failings of the Brussels 11a. Children retained illegally in an EU country against our court actions is breaking the law.
Up to 14 years for kidnapping and a lesser prison sentence to abduction, but judges do use the kidnapping as, and when.
Being in the EU means more than all this hot air, it means standing up for our rights as citizens, obviously your Party can’t do that.
In terms of negotiations on a referendum we could simply agree to a vote in Govt time, even if the LDs are free to vote against. Cameron will likely have the Labour rebels, DUP, UKIP on board and get over the line (may be LD rebels as well – I’d be tempted)
The reason I’d be tempted is that I think the next parliament is the best time to win a referendum, deal with the rise of UKIP, and cause existential splits within the Conservative party – just imagine how they will turn in on those campaigning on the other side.
And of course we can insist on 16 year olds getting the vote, EU citizens having their say. It seems to me that of all the Conservative plans to object to, this is some way down the list behind cuts, EVEL, boundary changes, inheritance tax changes, 40p thresholds etc. let’s leave some negotiating room to get a big price for the referendum and then let conference decide.
We could be getting the first Jewish PM.
Time for change, sorry but you don’t listen, that why I left your Party after many years. I don’t agree that another country can over rule court decisions, I don’t have believe a Party can ignore the situation, thank goodness I was able to make a stand on my own account, other Parties do listen, do take part.
Eddie Sammon 4th May ’15 – 2:17am…………….It’s all quite simple. If we leave the EU then we offer businesses sweeteners to make up for it. No need to panic…………………….
This “WE” are the taxpayers (and there was I thinking that there are already too many uncosted promises)…If a major plank of everything the party stands for is to be ‘sold’ to business what does that say about us?…..
Forget Europe, why when either realistic coalition option involves working with either a Tory authoritarian or Labour authoritarian party is there not a red line on individual liberty and human rights?
Beyond the uncertainty it would cause for the country, the problem with Cameron’s referendum proposal is that there’s no appetite with the rest of the EU members to begin any process of renegotiating Britain’s membership and Cameron’s attitude over the past five years hasn’t made any of them willing to make it happen. See here for more on it https://theconversation.com/fact-check-does-any-country-in-europe-other-than-britain-want-to-renegotiate-the-eu-treaty-40739 and note that the next German and French elections are due in 2017 and neither Merkel nor Hollande would be interested in any renegotiations before that date.
So, if Cameron sticks to his pledge to have a referendum before the end of 2017, there likely won’t be any renegotiated deal to have a referendum on, and the whole campaign will be run on him failing to achieve his promise. It’s a fast track to Brexit, and we shouldn’t be part of any government that wants to carry out such a policy.
Do you believe that justice failings are important? Your Party does not, these concern children.
Steve Way 4th May ’15 – 8:39am
“Forget Europe, why when either realistic coalition option involves working with either a Tory authoritarian or Labour authoritarian party is there not a red line on individual liberty and human rights?”
Steve, you mean something like …”The Liberal Democrats exist to build and safeguard a fair, free and open society. We will talk to any party but will not deviate from these core values” ?
I am again drawn to the importance placed on fairness in our constitution.
Charles – “with the USA in retreat across the Pacific, which other nation than Germany would be capable of having to guarantee the Scandinavian, Baltic and eastern European nations against an ever more desperate and aggressive Russia”
We have this things called “NATO”, Charles.
Norway and the Baltic States would have full recourse to collective defence. Sweden and Finland….
Oh, you meant to imply that the EU would gaurentee their security? May I just “lol” a little quietly to myself.
Yes, the EU was based on human rights and justice.
@Stephen Hesketh “I am again drawn to the importance placed on fairness in our constitution.”
I agree Stephen and that’s why all fair-minded members should support a full membership ballot to decide on any putative coalition deal.
“Beyond the uncertainty it would cause for the country, the problem with Cameron’s referendum proposal is that there’s no appetite with the rest of the EU members to begin any process of renegotiating Britain’s membership”
Regardless of whether they feel they have better things to be doing, we have an absolute imperative to address the impact of economic and legal consolidation within the eurozone.
The ECB has said it intends to manage ‘consensus’ among eurozone nations, and will act on that consensus using the tools of the EBU. As more and more economic activity comes under the aegis of QMV (which it needs to for monetary union to survive), this becomes a caucus which will override essential british sovereignty.
We do not have the luxury of sitting back and seeing if anything happens, it is right now. day by day:
http://www.openeurope.org.uk/Content/Documents/PDFs/EBAsafeguards.pdf
Sorry but not enough from the Party that not only agreed to, but defended on this site, Secret Courts. I want one of the Red Lines to guarentee no further erosions into our civil liberties and a reversal of such draconian legislation.
@Helen Dudden
Disraeli was the first”Jewish” PM. Quite what difference it makes is beyond me but your comment is more revealing about you than anything else.
Disraeli was not a practicing Jew, he converted and if he had not , Jews were not allowed in the House of Commons. Ed was born of a Jewish mother, and he remains a Jew.
I pointed out the importance of this possible event. Working on human rights and justice and , I know how important a proper legal system is. My comments were taken as to progress, how things move on.
expats, my point is that I can see people panicking, perhaps willfully, so thought I’d show what the plan B would look like.
I don’t see the panic about Labour refusing to put a time time on deficit reduction or any of their other bad economic ideas, so this isn’t really about the economy, but people trying to throw a wrecking ball into a coalition with the Conservatives.
I also hope, my comments are positive and provide information on the need to change, positive criticism of your Party failings.
@Caron
“As I’ve said before, we have to get them absolutely in full or walk away from government. Our credibility depends on it.”
You seem to believe that Lib Dem red lines are absolutely non-negotiable, but the Tories might be easily persuaded to give up theirs. That strikes me as slightly unrealistic!
I agree with those who say that the whole idea of “red lines” is a folly. Clegg has manoeuvred himself in to a position where he’s going to allow Cameron his red lines so long as Clegg gets his. This could mean a catastrophic EU exit for the sake of what… pay rises for public sector workers? Though I would benefit from such a pay rise myself, this seems like a poor trade.
This will definitely make the Lib Dems unvotable-for amongst some floating voters.
@Hireton
It was reported just a few months ago that a large proportion of European Jews were planning to flee the continent in terror. I doubt any of us thought we would see such things happening in our lifetimes.
In this context, I agree with Helen that the election of a Jewish PM would be a positive sign that Britain is a tolerant and open country. This is not a reason to vote for Miliband, and of course the point would stand if he was leading any other party or was a member of any other put-upon minority.
I worry about restrictions on European travel more than economic consequences of any referendum. Some small businesses feel that leaving the EU would be a sweetener in itself.
Many of us will be in the minority on this, but let’s not be afraid to say we won’t like the restrictions on free movement. Suddenly becoming passionate about the concerns of big business is not going to go down well.
The problem is that Britain’s economy is still dependent on the financial sector. Exports are woeful and productivity is down. This makes us very vulnerable to market jitters. My fear is that two years of uncertainty will stall investment and start a run on the banks by 2016 as the financial sector starts to panic about the economic certainty of Britain.
The point to me is that disengaging from the EU is not the same as going back to a pre-EU model,
Eddie Sammon 4th May ’15 – 10:59am……………….expats, my point is that I can see people panicking, perhaps willfully, so thought I’d show what the plan B would look like. ……………..I don’t see the panic about Labour refusing to put a time time on deficit reduction or any of their other bad economic ideas, so this isn’t really about the economy, but people trying to throw a wrecking ball into a coalition with the Conservatives…………..
Perhaps, as you are so keen on answers, you might tell me ( and the rest of the country) the details of Osborne’s £12Billion welfare reform; or is it only Labour who need to ‘come clean’?
@stuart But some of those floating voters whose votes we are seeking will be sympathetic to the idea of an EU referendum – from both left and right.
expats, I don’t know the details of it, but as I said in my first post: I think a coalition with Labour or the Conservatives should be on the table, but if people take a coalition with the Conservatives off the table then one with Labour has to go too.
I will personally be pushing for your Party to stand up and be counted on E U failings. Not having enough MPs is not an answer. If someone attends a surgery with issue’s, you have to do your very best, not your least.
Come on Nick Clegg, show your Party has some courage for failings, don’t just state the above.
@Caron Lindsay
“But some of those floating voters whose votes we are seeking will be sympathetic to the idea of an EU referendum – from both left and right.”
I completely agree with that. Some will see this development as a positive reason for swinging to the Lib Dems, some will see it as the opposite. Perhaps Clegg has done the calculations and decided it’s a worthwhile gamble.
At least we have a proper issue to talk about at last after the most unedifying election campaign in living memory!
Caron Lindsay 4th May ’15 – 11:47am……………@stuart But some of those floating voters whose votes we are seeking will be sympathetic to the idea of an EU referendum – from both left and right…………
There are already two parties to attract those. Whatever makes you believe that surrendering a major plank in the ‘LibDem are different’ would work…You are more likely to lose voters than gain them…
Eddie Sammon 4th May ’15 – 12:07pm………………..expats, I don’t know the details of it, but as I said in my first post: I think a coalition with Labour or the Conservatives should be on the table, but if people take a coalition with the Conservatives off the table then one with Labour has to go too………….
We’ve tried one coalition; I don’t want another….The Tories may need LibDems and offer another coalition but, practically, as the SNP will never support a Tory led government, Labour’s need is less….A Labour minority government, with ‘unofficial’ SNP backing can be a viable option…I’d like a ‘new’ LibDem party to push it’s own clear policies on a case by case basis…That way we can start to regain trust and rebuild
Come on Caron that’s just sophistry
@ Eddie Sammon
“Suddenly becoming passionate about the concerns of big business is not going to go down well.”
I am not passionate about the concerns of big business. I am passionate about not causing unemployment. Some big businesses are here because we are part of the single EU market. Hopefully other businesses will come here because we are part of the single EU market. Therefore if we leave the single EU market these new business may not come here and those that are here will have to consider if they should be based in a country that is in the single EU market.
If Lib Dems are (now), on the verge of ditching their ‘red line obstruction’ to a an EU in/out referendum, why didn’t you simply accept it (and stick with it), 7 years ago when you had a ‘Real Referendum pledge’, and avoid the decimation of your party and loss of ‘troops’? Moreover,..[to emphasise the point], if Clegg had stuck to his pledge on an in/out EU Referendum back in 2008/10, can you not see that UKIP might not even be on the political radar, let alone double your vote numbers.?
Was it worth it?
I was perturbed by Nick Clegg’s responses to Andrew Marr, although I accept that this is a difficult to deal with. I thought that Nick was about to arrive at an answer when he referred to Cameron’s inability to explain what would be ‘renegotiated’. But I thought he fluffed it. Nick Clegg could have insisted that he could not agree on a referendum while Cameron cannot set parameters on his ‘renegotiation’. Furthermore in the absence of treaty change, what happens if there is a new treaty in 2020? Would that mean yet another referendum?
That said I remain convinced that the leadership is manoeuvring towards being able to justify not being part of a coalition.
There are two quite separate issues here.
Playing games with red lines is up to the party, bearing in mind that the electorate will be looking on with critical interest.
Granting the electorate a vote on continued EU membership, given that the EU makes over 75% of our legislation, is long overdue. How dare any party deny basic democracy.
@ Michael BG
You pay too much attention to the scaremongering of your leader. Participation in the single market does not require membership of the EU.
@ Peter
“Participation in the single market does not require membership of the EU.”
It is possible for a country that is not in the EU to have to abide by the decisions of the EU regarding regulations and directives and then be part of the EU market. However I thought that one of the reasons for leaving the EU was that EU regulation was bad for the UK.
If we were part of the EU market but not part of the EU according to you 75% of our legislation would come from the EU but we would have no say in what that legislation is. (I am not convinced that 75% of our legislation comes direct from the EU.)
If we left the EU how could a UK government justify being subject to EU legislation but no longer having any say in what it is? There is no guarantee that the EU would allow us to be part of the EU single market once we left the EU.
Peter
“Granting the electorate a vote on continued EU membership, given that the EU makes over 75% of our legislation, is long overdue.”
Oh please! That old UKIP lie? I thought that had been comprehensively buried. Go on, give us your source for that piece of complete manure. Is it this video of a 6-year-old speech by a German MEP that has been clearly, conclusively and comprehensively debunked? Or have you found a new source for this fiction?
Peter said “Participation in the single market does not require membership of the EU.”
True enough, but look at the example of Norway. They pay in huge amounts of money for little more than a trade agreement, and have to abide by large numbers of EU directives that they have no say in framing. They don’t have a seat in the European Council or the European Parliament, yet they still participate as a non-voting member in much of the work that the EU does. The cost saving that UKIP claim would be wiped out by the need to pay a subscription in the same way as Norway (though of course the fee for the UK with 10 times the population would be much higher).
“There are many legitimate criticisms to be made of the European Parliament, but irrelevance or lack of importance, the stock accusations, are laughably wide of the mark. Probably half of all new legislation now enacted in the UK begins in Brussels. The European parliament has extensive powers to amend or strike down laws in almost every conceivable area of pulic life.”
– Nick Clegg MEP, The Guardian, Monday 8 December 2003, 09.26 GMT
If Clegg estimated that half of UK legislation emanated from the EU 12 years ago, long before the Lisbon treaty, then 75% seems to be a reaonable estimate for today. However, the actual percentage is irrelevant.
Clegg’s admission that such powers have been handed to the EU together with his refusal to seek the approval of the UK electorate, is in my view, highly hypocritical and undemocratic. To veto attempts by others to hold a referendum is unacceptable.
I am surprised by the lack of understanding of the EU expressed here.
The EU is a political construction with the objective of creating the country of Europe. The EU laws cover almost every aspect of our affairs as confirmed by Clegg back in 2003.
The single market is a different entity. Like any market, it has rules and regulations covering all aspects of trade.However,in recent decades, globalisation has taken over which means that trading rules are now agreed at a world level, mainly through agencies of the UN.
The EU is just one member at these negotiations alongside other countries such as Norway and Iceland. These tiny countries therefore enjoy direct participation in the trade negotiations while the UK does not. Furthermore, these countries are free to negotiate their own trade agreements with the rest of the world. Iceland recently made such an agreement with China.
We are a net purchaser of goods from the EU, particularly cars from Germany. The EU would be desparate to keep the UK as a trading partner within the single market even if we left the political construction that is the EU.
As the Eurozone countries head towards further political and financial integration, a process only delayed by the Greek problem, the position of the UK will become untenable. We shall either have to accept the Euro and relinquish our remaining sovereignty or leave the EU.
I know that the Lib Dems favour a middle way which is to be an Associate member. This is to remain in the Country of Europe waiting room until public acceptance of the EU improves enough for us to accept full integration.
But Nick Cleggs MPs have no interest in the laws when it’s not working. You either do what I did get the textbooks out or put up.
Not one comment came out of this, I will ask again, why do your MPs not have interest in the subject of The Brussels 11a on international child abduction? Why is there no one in the all party? This is law, and you seem to want the EU but not the interest in the failings.
@Peter
“Clegg’s admission that such powers have been handed to the EU together with his refusal to seek the approval of the UK electorate, is in my view, highly hypocritical and undemocratic. To veto attempts by others to hold a referendum is unacceptable.”
Relax – Clegg has dropped even heavier hints today that he’s going to allow a referendum. Even Caron must admit that this now looks like a dead cert :-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32588746
So much for being “the party of in” – now the Lib Dems are the party of giving Cameron and Farage exactly what they want, in exchange for another five years riding around in ministerial cars.
Good news for democracy if Clegg drops his plan to veto a referendum, even if it is for selfish reasons.
If Clegg wants us to stay in, he can argue the case in a democratic manner – just as in the EU parliamentary election.
oh dear, that reminds of why he wants to veto a referendum….
That was obvious to me a long time ago. If you are interested in something you give it your all.
I think its just being very lazy and ignoring to those who put you there.
The sheer cheek of discussing a provably coalition, even before the vote is done.
I would hope Caron would comment following Clegg’s interview today where he gave the strongest hint yet that he will accept a referendum….
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32588746
“Earlier Mr Clegg told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme he was not in principle opposed to a referendum on EU membership – claiming other issues like the NHS and “balancing the books” were bigger priorities than the EU poll.”
I agree with Steve Way.
This still does not solve the problems of cases that get lost in the system.
Lady Catherine Meyer was one, Beth Alexander and her twin boys in Vienna, my issues and countless others caught up in issues going nowhere. The others did have support, but it is difficult to achieve results. When it goes wrong, you have to wait until the children are old enough to make decisions.
If course, your leader is taking the situation as he sees it, but that did not help me. Your Party shows no interest in the subject if child abduction and access.
No MPs from your Party in the all party, and also not interested in the subject.
Helen Dudden – Please forgive me for not being familiar with your cause but I can see that you are passionate about it. You are not receiving any sympathy from this site. May I refer you to Christopher Booker, a journalist who has strong feelings about juvenile cases and the injustice metred out by UK courts. He is passionate about that.
You can find details of Christopher Booker on the internet. I, personally, am not able to help you, but I wish you well with your cause.
No nor did receive sympathy from my MP. That is why it is important we make change happen. I work to change the Lum Dems.
I heard the hysterical squabbling between Clegg and Humphreys on the “Today” Programme. I didn’t think it did Clegg any good since he came over as being desperate for power at all costs. The high frequency babble was pretty incoherent but I got the impression that he would sell his grannie for coalition power. Perhaps that was an accurate assessment.