As French and German officials make final preparations ahead of tomorrow’s meeting
on fiscal union, it’s worth reconsidering the coalition’s triple referendum lock. James Kirkup has an incisive post on the issue, describing a potential
government split. The division was evident on TV this morning: Iain Duncan Smith told Dermot Murnaghan that a referendum would be held ‘if there is a major treaty change’, while Nick
Clegg told Andrew Marr that only ‘an additional surrender of sovereignty from us to Brussels’ can spark a vote.
Kirkup argues that IDS reflects the broader sceptic position on the Tory backbenches: that the PM has promised a vote on all substantial treaty changes. In fact, the legislation says something very different: section 4 makes clear that only transfers of sovereign government competences can trigger a referendum.
Of course, much of this might be semantic: IDS may define a ‘major treaty change’ exclusively as a transfer of British sovereignty. But if Kirkup is right, then the government must start working the Commons tearooms.
However, the good news for the Cameron is that the crisis appears to have shaken some Eurosceptic resolve, so long as he ensures that British sovereignty is not the price of stabilising the eurozone. Rebel MP Andrew Percy told yesterday’s FT that stability is now the priority. If the prevailing backbench definition of, in Cameron’s words, ‘furthering and protecting British interests’ changes from the impossible task of a grand repatriation of powers to the merely hard task of preserving the Eurozone, then that is to the prime minister’s advantage as the European Union enters this critical week.
Comments