Referendum trick

There has been a bit of talk about the possibility of a referendum on the UK’s membership of the EU. What is being said is that the Labour Party will support the idea so as to try to expose the Conservatives’ differences on Europe, and that the Liberals will approve it thinking that the answer wil be yes and it will put the matter to bed. Thus Cameron will be bounced into offering it in his manifesto. Most people assume I am a supporter of the idea, but I’m not so sure I am.

I start from the basis of the conclusion I came to in 1991, that Britain would be better off, both financially and democratically, if it left the EU. Nothing that has happened since then has made me reconsider: if anything I feel it more strongly.

And it is hard to dispute the legality or constitutionality of a referendum. The matter is important enough to be put to the people, and there is the precedent of the referendum held in 1975 – so far the only nation-wide referendum ever held in Britain – when we decided to stay in.

So: important and constitutionally defensible. It is only then that the problems start.

First is the question, which will be asked by the government. Now, David Cameron has tried to spin himself as a eurosceptic, but in my view all his actions since coming to power and even before, point to a man who is quite comfortable in the EU. He wants us to trust him to be fair on this, and I, frankly, don’t.

It’s not just the nature of the question. I don’t suppose Cameron will try ‘Do you want us to leave the EU, with all that that will entail in terms of lost jobs and being politically isolated, or do you want to pursue the broad sunlit uplands of prosperity and peace with our partners, our European brothers?’ – although with most of the administrations since 1975 that is roughly what you would have got.

No, it’s the practicality of the matter. Cameron won’t call it ‘leaving the EU’ – he calls it ‘renegotiating the terms of our membership’. But every time we have asked for changes, the answer has been ‘Non’. The only difference this time is that it will be ‘Nein’. They don’t want Britain to become more efficient and prosperous by opting out of the ugly bits.

So the only occasion we can renegotiate is when they have something to lose. If Cameron had held his nerve on the Fiscal Pact, rather than giving in immediately and allowing them to use civil servants, partly paid for by Britain, to draft its terms and put it into practice, if only he hadn’t rolled over, we could have had that as a bargaining point: if you want your Fiscal Pact Britain opts out of the Common Agricultural and Fisheries policies, the working time directive, the health and safety nonsense which they pretend is part of the single market, the common policing, the European Arrest Warrant, European Army and all the rest.

Now, we can only have a negotiating point, a point d’appui, if they decide to have another grand treaty. And they aren’t likely to in the foreseeable future.

So Cameron reckons he can negotiate something simple and easy – cheaper biscuits in meetings and an undertaking the European Army won’t invade Norway -  and then put it to the people as the best that could be negotiated, thus silencing debate on the subject for a generation.

He has to be exposed and resisted. The only suitable question is ‘Do you want to stay in the EU or leave it?’.

Anything else is a con-trick on the British people.