Gordon Brown won’t answer about why he signed the EU Treaty without a vote

Gordon Brown’s case for signing the Treaty without the referendum he promised was based on the proposition that he was relying on Parliamentary approval.

When I and others asked for a debate and a vote in Parliament before he went to Lisbon to sign, we were refused.

The Prime Minister went ahead and signed without either the promised referendum or a vote in Parliament. So much for democratic accountability, and for involving people and their elected representatives in the main decisions.

Today I asked him the simple quesiton, what will the government do if either the Commons or the Lords votes to modify the proposed legislaiton to implement the Treaty he has signed? He refused to answer.

The truth is, Parliament will be told it has to accept the Bill as drafted, because it has to accept the Treaty it is implementing lock stock and barrel. Gordon Brown is not going to go back to the partners in the EU to renegotiate any part of it which Parliament does not like.

The 20 days or so of promised debate on this Treaty in the Commons next year will be a farce. It is happening too late, as the Treaty is a done deal. We will not be told to take it or leave it, but to take it or take it. Doubtless the massed rank of Lib/Lab MPs will oblige, and the massed ranks of Lib/Lab peers.

No wonder people are fed up with politics. This government is playing silly games with such crucial matters. They spin they want Parliament to have more power, yet by this Treaty they have just given away a lot more of Parliament’s power, without a single vote that matters before they did so.


  1. Cliff
    December 17, 2007

    What really annoyed me today was the number of empty places in the chamber during Mr Brown's statement on the European Council.
    This "treaty" is more than likely the most important document regarding our slide into a giant European super state and the loss of our own British identity and yet many of those that were elected to serve our people and that have sworn loyalty to HM, decided to stay away. No wonder this treasonous government can ride rough shod over us all.

    Reply|: I counted just 46 Labour backbenchers. I guess they are ashamed of the Treaty and of their government's refusal to honour its pledge for a referendum. They certainly were not out there supporting it in large numbers as the troump their PM claimed.

  2. mikestallard
    December 17, 2007

    It really does not matter what is signed and what isn't.
    The first European Ambassador has already been appointed. (Koen Vervaeke)
    The President and the Foreign Minister and his staff have already been appointed. (Javier de Solana).
    Just Google them to see the staff.
    On Daniel Hannan's Website, there are the scenes from the European parliament where 50 MEPs unfurled a banner and carried pieces of paper saying "REFERENDUM". Oh Dear – they were told to put them away.
    The general idea is that "Brussels knows best".

    My problem is that I don't trust them. So how do I vote them out and a better lot in?
    Even worse: Who really does support them? Certainly my own Eastern European students don't.

  3. Ken Adams
    December 18, 2007

    This is really easy to sort out; Conservatives should stay away from the 20 days of wasted debate, but offer a referendum after the next election.

Comments are closed.