M-02: Conditional Referendum on the Single Currency

User avatar
Clarice Ashbridge
Posts: 49
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2020 10:55 pm
Constituency: Eastwood
XP: 3
Trait(s): None
Discord username: LegolasRedbard

M-02: Conditional Referendum on the Single Currency

Post by Clarice Ashbridge »

Madam Speaker,

I beg leave to offer the House the following Motion.
“That this House believes that the United Kingdom should not adopt the Euro, and calls upon the Government to either formally rule out adoption or to immediately begin preparations for a popular referendum so that the British people can make the final decision about our nation’s economic future.”

Madam Speaker,

I rise today to introduce this motion, which both expresses the sentiment of the House against the European single currency, and affirms this House’s confidence in the people of Britain to make their own decisions when it comes to an issue of such historic significance as this. I was not, Madam Speaker, expecting to be the member introducing this motion today, and I am sure that the whole House will join me in wishing my Right Honourable friend the member for Aldershot well as he fights against his cancer. Plenty of time has already been dedicated to discussing this issue, and this motion ensures that more will, so for my part I will try and summarise clearly and concisely our position on this matter.

The first part of this motion expresses clearly what I believe is an opinion shared by a majority of members across both sides of this House: that the Euro is bad for Britain, and should be comprehensively ruled out by the Prime Minister and the Chancellor. Whilst the Chancellor in recent times seems to have taken a step back from his buccaneer days as a pro-Euro guerilla, it is undeniable that he still holds a torch for his one true love, even if he cannot outright say it. One does not simply go from calling something an “economic no-brainer” to urging caution and restraint so soon, after all. Instead, wishing to play the part of a moderate and sensible figure, a cut above the rest, he hides behind the five economic tests introduced by the member for Dunfermline East when he was Chancellor. There has been a lot said about these tests in recent months, especially by those in government. The claims are that these economic tests are not political, that they are independent of any Government decision and that we should simply take these figures from Treasury experts at their words. If the tests say no, says the Chancellor, then there will be no Euro. These tests raise more questions than they answer. Firstly, in what world would any assessment of what is best for this country’s economy conclude that surrendering control of our capability to set interest rates and tying our country’s fortunes, irrevocably, to the risk of 14 other European nations is a good move for Britain? Secondly, if these tests are meant to be independent and free from political interference, why did the Prime Minister’s predecessor bring forward the review after his party received a solid drubbing in the European elections? And that, Madam Speaker, tells us why we shouldn’t be paying attention to these tests at all: easily fudgeable tests subject to political interference. Additionally, Madam Speaker, there has been a worrying trend under this New Labour project, to use experts and policy wonks as an excuse for poor decision making. Experts should be used to help craft policy that benefits the whole nation, not as human shields to excuse indecision and incompetence. And when it comes to the question of our national sovereignty, the Conservatives say that the only experts who ultimately matter are the British people.


Let’s put the economic tests aside, Madam Speaker, and focus on the European Union’s own criteria set out in the Maastricht Treaty. The need for “convergence”, Madam Speaker, betrays an uncomfortable fact about these economic tests: there will never be convergence between all the European economies to the extent that would be required for our entry into the single currency. Whilst, arguably, the economies of Western Europe and Britain could at one point converge enough to justify entry into the Euro, let us not forget that the European Union is a project that is incredibly dedicated to it’s own enlargement. Current member states like Greece with a predisposition to running large deficits already prove a threat to the future of the Euro before it has even begun, but the PHARE programme for assisting Eastern European states in their accession to the EU, and the Euro, puts the states of Western Europe at risk of being dragged down by the East. A “one size fits all” approach should not, and cannot, suit the diverse nations of Europe, and any attempt to do so is a project doomed from the start.

This brings me on to the second part of the motion, Madam Speaker. If the Government does not take clear and decisive action now to rule out the Euro once and for all, then the very least that can be done is for the ultimate decision over this matter to be put back to the people. All the opposition doing here, Madam Speaker, is trying to cure the case of amnesia that has suddenly come over the government. They were elected only a matter of months ago on a policy promising a referendum on the Euro, but have now proven to be less than forthcoming when pressed on the issue. This policy is not only popular, having won pro-referendum parties an overwhelming victory in 1999 at the Euro elections, but it is democratic, allowing the people to take control of this process rather than us here in this House. It is right that an issue of such paramount importance to the people of this country is made by the people of this country; especially when this government has abdicated their responsibility to govern.
The Hon. Clarice Ashbridge MP, Lady Ashbridge
Scottish Conservative and Unionist
Shadow Secretary of State for the Home Department (October 2001 - present)
Shadow Minister for Women and Equalities (June 2001 - present)
MP for Eastwood (2001 - present)
User avatar
Barclay A.A. Stanley
Posts: 249
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2020 1:26 pm
Constituency: Macclesfield
XP: 0
Trait(s):
Discord username: @BarclayCalhoun#5933

Re: M-02: Conditional Referendum on the Single Currency

Post by Barclay A.A. Stanley »

(A gentle reminder that debate begins immediately upon the introduction of a motion. Literally anyone can weigh in at this stage.)
Lt. Col. Sir Barclay A.A. Stanley, Rtd., KBE
Member of Parliament for Macclesfield

Armed with nothing but a pint of gin, Sir Barclay went to battle against the forces of Communism, Socialism, and Liberalism.
User avatar
Elizabeth Tanner
Labour MP
Labour MP
Posts: 166
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 5:01 pm
Constituency: Westminster North
XP: 10
Trait(s): None
Discord username: Morgan#2072

Re: M-02: Conditional Referendum on the Single Currency

Post by Elizabeth Tanner »

Margaret Beckett, Leader of the House

Madam Speaker, time will be allocated for this motion.
Elizabeth Tanner
MP for Westminster North

First Secretary of State
Secretary of State for Foreign, Defence and Commonwealth Affairs
User avatar
Ege
Labour MP
Labour MP
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 9:10 pm
Constituency: North Somerset
XP: 5
Trait(s): None
Discord username: Ege#5944

Re: M-02: Conditional Referendum on the Single Currency

Post by Ege »

Madame Speaker,

Today, I will be making one side of this house very sad and that side will be the treasury benches and government backbenches. I admit the debate on this issue has turned lively, a bit too lively but I have no intention to pour more flame into it. Madame Speaker, as a proud member of the only national party in the Commons that is heavily opposed to Euro, we are not having a divergence on the first part of this motion which is to get the government to drop the Euro for good. Now the Leader of the Opposition and I have had spirited debates about the second part of this motion which we disagree but I ultimately believe both of us come from a genuine desire to make our country a better place. When you genuinely believe in something, Madame Speaker, as we all know things get heated because we care, we care so deeply that we can get heated, even a bit angry but Madame Speaker all of this happened because we care about this beautiful country so much. Now nothing has changed, I still disagree with the Leader of the Opposition, I still believe in the rejection of the motion in question but Madame Speaker, neither members of the Opposition nor the British public are idiots. When the chancellor and members of this government criticised this proposal as a way of Leader of the Opposition to settle differences within our party which is something I completely disagree and reject as the reasoning of why Leader of the Opposition pushing this motion right now and criticised politicisation of this decision, I find it rather curious that the Government granting time to it Madame Speaker. Leader of the Opposition did not gain anything from this debate politically speaking Madame Speaker, he chose to push something he believed in and we disagree on it but Madame Speaker, this government is cynically granting time to a motion that they vigorously oppose because they believe this is good politics for their party and Madame Speaker if that is not hypocrisy, then I have no idea what is.

To the Conservative backbenchers, I am begging you to join me rejecting this motion but I am also begging you to join me to reject this utterly contemptible government's shameless attempt to score political points.
Annette Faure MP
Member for Blackpool South (2015-present)
User avatar
Will Frost
Conservative MP
Conservative MP
Posts: 285
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 3:22 pm
Constituency: Tatton
XP: 6
Trait(s): None
Discord username: Croft

Re: M-02: Conditional Referendum on the Single Currency

Post by Will Frost »

I rise today in complete support of the Motion presented by the Shadow Foreign Secretary.

I'd like to begin by commending my Rt. Hon Friend the Shadow Foreign Secretary for the speech she gave introducing the Opposition's Motion. The Shadow Foreign Secretary perfectly illuminated the position of the Conservative Party: that adopting the euro would be a dangerous mistake, that it would be a catastrophic surrender of Britain's sovereignty, and that the British people should have the opportunity to relegate it to the dustbin of history.

I'd also like to thank the Prime Minister for her willingness to allow this motion to be debated and voted upon. For someone who is so clearly opposed to democratic consultation on the issue of the euro, I find her change of heart very brave indeed.

There are two distinct reasons why I support this Motion, Madam Speaker: to fulfill my duty as the leader of the Conservative Party, and more importantly, to fulfill my obligation as Leader of this country's Opposition. Allow me to begin my remarks by speaking about the latter.

In 1999, the Conservative Party voted overwhelmingly against adoption of the euro. I was one of the thousands of members who voted against adoption, and I stand here today as leader of my party committed to doing everything in my power to see that position through. Conservatives across the country recognize what Britons of all political affiliations know: that no matter the circumstances, that no matter the timetable, and that no matter how hard New Labour tries to tell us otherwise that adoption of the euro would spell ruin for our country's economy and sense of independence. That is why the first aspect of this Motion, urging the Government to rule out adopting the euro altogether, is so critical. No analysis from an economist under the employ of the Treasury, and of a Chancellor who is so obviously biased in favor of the single currency, could ever convince us otherwise. The euro will bind our monetary policy to Brussels, robbing Britain of the flexibility and control we need to meet the unique economic challenges we as a sovereign nation face. It will tie us to European economies that are less stable than our own, and that face issues that are fundamentally different from ours. And it will deprive us of the incredibly important national pride and confidence that comes from independently determining our country's economic future.

My position is incredibly clear: the timing for adopting the euro will never be right. The surrender of our sovereignty and economic independence will never be worth whatever perceived benefit we reap from further integration with the European continent. While those on the Government benches may be satisfied with the thought of pulling out a £5 note and seeing the face of Charles DeGaulle looking back at them, we in the Opposition say in unison: never.

More important than my duty to my party, Madam Speaker, is my duty to this country. As Leader of the Opposition it is my obligation to scrutinize the policies of this Government, and to call them out for what they are. Their promise to consult the British people on the euro only after their own economic tests have been met is disingenuous and a blight on the democratic process. As the Shadow Foreign Secretary argued so succinctly, the Government's decision to review their 5 economic tests and therefore delay the referendum came only after they faced an electoral massacre in the most recent European Parliament elections. But you don't have to take my word for it, Madam Speaker, to believe that this Government has a track record of inconsistency on the euro. In fact, you can listen to the Government themselves! In 1997, the former Chancellor said that if the currency is successful that Britain should join it, and that the Government was making preparations to join the currency, "early in the next Parliament." Today, despite all those preparations we've heard so much about, the current Chancellor has recently told the House that we won't be joining, "for the duration of this Parliament." We have had four years of successive Chancellors moving the goalposts, but the one thing that has remained the same is Labour's continued refusal to let the British people have their say. The reality has become perfectly clear: while the Government is concerned solely with political considerations, those of us on this side of the House are deeply concerned about the national consequences of losing our independent currency.

Which brings me to the second key component of this Motion: calling for a conditional referendum if and when the Government refuses to rule out the euro. The state rarely if ever knows better than the British people when it comes to what is good for our country, and the issue of the euro is no exception. While the Prime Minister equivocates on the topic, refusing to be pinned down and keeping her options open so that the Government will be free to adopt the euro on their terms, the British economy suffers. The inconsistency in the Government's approach confuses consumers, businesses, and investors. Having no central commitment to the pound, and no concrete timetable on adopting the euro, isn't an economic strategy: it's chaos. So I say to my colleagues on the Opposition benches, and to the people of this country, let us end the logjam once and for all and offer a referendum so that Britons can save the pound and reject the euro for good.

I will be the first to admit that I have a tendency to be aggressive when it comes to issues that I am passionate about. And while I know that I may not always act in the most... friendly of ways, I make no apology for my passionate defense of British sovereignty. I agree entirely with my Hon Friend, yes you heard that right, my friend, the Member for Beverly and Holderness when she says that two people can disagree passionately on matters of politics and still be united in their commitment for doing what is best for the country. She is doing just that, and no matter our political differences, we will always be personally united in our commitment to relieve the British people of a Government intent on dragging us into the European Single Currency.

I will conclude, Madam Speaker, by saying what I have said many times before. Often times the most responsible course of action involves taking the boldest of measures. Proposing a referendum is bold, it does come with risks for those of us who are determined to save the pound, but it is far better than the alternative of letting a pro-euro Government set the agenda indefinitely. Our economic future, and therefore the future of our social services and our small businesses, is dependent upon Britain's ability to retain our financial independence and our own currency. Our way of life, our sovereignty, and our dignity as a free nation are at risk. The stakes could not be higher, and the only people I trust making the right decision are the men and women of this great country.
Will Frost MP
User avatar
Andy Edwards
Posts: 90
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 7:30 pm
Constituency: Ellesmere Port and Neston
XP: 6
Trait(s): None
Discord username: aboltik

Re: M-02: Conditional Referendum on the Single Currency

Post by Andy Edwards »

Madam Speaker,

How short the memory of the Conservatives are on their support- now opposition- to tying our economy to Europe. It was the Conservative Party that first tied our economy to that of Europe in 1990 when they made the decision to join the European Exchange Rate Mechanism. Former Prime Minister John Major- a Conservative- proposed having a European currency circulating in conjunction with national currencies. While the Tories of today might call that insane, that's the situation we have today: the euro and national currencies are both used in Europe in the lead-up to the full adoption of the euro come January.

Our forced withdrawal from the ERM at the cost of £3 billion- again, under the Tories, I should add- which demonstrated precisely WHY the Government has its five tests: if you go into something at the wrong time, it will cost you far more than it's worth. We rushed in then without ensuring that it was right, without making sure that we negotiated the right exchange rate, and for the next two years the UK was forced to intervene in foreign exchange markets to make up the peg. Again, under the Tories.

Our five tests will ensure that if we do ever consider joining the euro- which will again come after a referendum as we have so clearly stated- we will NOT repeat the mistakes of the Tories and the ERM. While the Right Honourable Member for Chipping Barnet talks about having no plan being the worst possible case, he ignores the fact that we already learned that lesson- thanks to the Tories and the ERM. Right now, as the Chancellor has stated, the five tests have not been met. The UK is not ready to consider euro membership.

At the same time, the Right Honourable Member for Chipping Barnet has this fantasy where he thinks the moment the tests are met, that this Government will say "from tomorrow, we will use the euro." That's the only possible explanation for the flight of fancy that he has laid out before this House. But even if by some economic luck the conditions are ripe- this Government would still push for a referendum and respect that result.

Perhaps laughably, this Government's position on a referendum is more democratic than that of this motion before us. This Government has guaranteed a referendum; this Conservative motion does NOT. Yes, yes, we will be told that the Conservatives support giving the people a voice while they discount over and over again that the people may yet vote in favour of joining the euro.

But the thing is, Madam Speaker, this motion seeks to not allow this choice. This motion does NOT support a referendum. This motion seeks to tie this Government to rejection of the euro now and forevermore... and only then, if not, hold a referendum. The preference of this motion- and indeed the preference of the Conservatives- is that we reject the euro.

If this motion passes, and if this Government were to rule out the euro now and forevermore, is there a referendum? No. That's it. All the vaunted talk about how the British people should have their say will be thrown out and ignored. However, this Government has committed to a referendum when the time is right- so that if there IS a yes vote, then we are prepared to do so.

I respect the choice this Government has made and I support it: if the time is right, if the five tests are met, we will hold the referendum. That way if it DOES result in the British people wanting to join the euro, we will not crash headfirst into economic mismanagement and disaster- a lesson that we learned from the Tories of not all that long ago. And if it it results in a rejection of the euro, then that's a decision we'll respect. We've been consistent in our stance- and we will remain so. This referendum creates more uncertainty and more danger than the Government's position ever will- even if somehow we do end up putting de Gaulle, a steadfast ally against Naziism, on a pound note.
Andrew Edwards MP
MP for Ellesmere Port and Neston (1992-) | Labour
Secretary of State for the Home Office (2001-)
CWard
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 8:53 pm
XP: 5
Trait(s): None
Discord username: CWard

Re: M-02: Conditional Referendum on the Single Currency

Post by CWard »

Madam Speaker, I rise against the motion presented here today. The leader of the opposition has put this forward with a very odd argument. He has come to this house and told us how much he is against the adoption of the euro. He has been passionate in the press that he does not support it. Let me quote him just now “the adoption of the euro would be chaos for the country”. Then why madam speaker would he make it a possibility? He speaks of chaos, but it is rather far more chaotic for us to hold a referendum when the timing isn’t right, the people vote in favour of adoption and now we have to adopt something that by his own words would be a mistake. That isn’t just chaotic Madam Speaker, it’s foolish. It is foolish to risk us being dragged into the Euro to prevent that very action. This is economic Russian Roulette. He would rather risk a crashed economy into a currency that we are not ready for than wait for the country to be ready. Does he not see that if the Euro were to never meet those requirements, then he has what he wants. He’s the only leader to be so opposed to a single currency that he demands we risk joining it.

This government has been consistent in our messaging: If the euro were to pass the five economic tests that we have laid out, then we would put it to the people to adopt. We’re not moving or wavering from that position. That is the position of the government from the Prime Minister down to even myself. It is ironclad and concrete. He speaks as if there is this secret cabal of Labour cabinet members who are going to wake up one morning and say “we’re adopting the euro” But that’s never been said and it is not true. That is based on superstition and fear. In fact I challenge him to rise to that dispatch box and show evidence of the chancellor having intent to as he said “drag us into European Single Currency”. He has said that is our intent, let him show us all the evidence. Let him show us. But he won’t because he can’t.

He speaks of logjam and confusion. If he wants to find the source of confusion on the issue, he doesn’t need a referendum, he needs a mirror. Members of his own party have railed against him and his “vote first, build a plan later” policy on this issue. He stood in the last election promising no referendum. That was the what the manifesto said, I have a copy here. No referendum. In fact let me quote one Conservative member “ The Shadow Cabinet cannot hide facts. This is a huge change of policy from the manifesto. If they truly support sovereignty the policy should be no to the Euro, full stop. No referendum, no support for a single currency unless there is a risk that the government would push for the single currency. Instead it is the Conservative leadership that is creating that risk.” that’s not the daily mirror or the Guardian, that’s the member from Woking!

His own shadow chancellor said if the Leader of the Opposition supported a referendum he would resign, and yet here he sits still. The lack of conviction on full display for all to see. The problem is that this Leader of the Opposition flings about from one breakneck action to other and then cries “Havoc”. Here is your engine of chaos, here is lack of conviction!

No Madam Speaker, this government will not risk the economic future of the country so that the Opposition can have his day. Rather we will govern in the interest of the people. If the five tests are met, he can have his referendum. But until then we are staying with the pound, regardless of the baseless accusation of the Opposition.
Calvin James Ward
Labour MP for Glasgow-Maryhill
Fred Sackville-Bagg
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 10:04 pm
XP: 9
Trait(s): None
Discord username: Kinbote

Re: M-02: Conditional Referendum on the Single Currency

Post by Fred Sackville-Bagg »

Madam Speaker,

I wish to start by saying that no matter how many tests the Euro passes I will never support it as I strongly believe that giving up our currency would not only be giving up our sovereignty, but it would cause chaos and economic ruin if our economy demanded one thing and the EU forced us to do something else. We would be tied to the EU and the Euro, no matter what our country wanted - we would be limited in our options. If the Euro sank, HMS Britannia would have to follow suit. As a nation we must be free to follow our own economic and monetary policy, not be joined to the EU's hip.

If my opposition to the Euro is still in doubt, I want you all to know that I would much rather be discussing an in/out referendum on the EU itself.

That said, I do not support this motion. It isn't because deep down inside I want to join the Euro. I would rather we left the entire EU itself. It isn't because I do not believe in democracy. As I have said elsewhere I would rather have had this policy put to a party conference vote before becoming "party policy".

I am against this motion because I do not see the need for a referendum at this time. The Government have said that the country is not ready to join the Euro, and indeed may never be. I, too, would rather the Government stepped up and said as we have said - this country should never adopt the Euro and be done with it. We know that this isn't going to happen - we all know they are not going to rule out membership of the Euro for good.

Therefore, Madam Speaker, this motion would therefore force a referendum on the issue of the Euro if this motion passes. If this motion passes, I would strain every sinew to its limit to fight against the adoption of the Euro. However, I understand that battles can be lost.

My primary concern is that if we lose the battle to keep the pound, and the public vote to adopt the Euro - we have a government unwilling and unprepared to enter into that currency union. That has nothing to do with being anti-democratic - it is a simple fact. The government are currently just as unwilling and unprepared to adopt the Euro and enter a currency union as the Conservative Party would be, the economy even more so.

If it was just government preparations that would be needed - they could be ironed out within a few months, potentially longer - however it would not be just government preparations - it would be economic and monetary preparations. Despite what some people say - you cannot force an economy to be ready for something it is not, at least not without damage to that economy.

What the Conservative Party need to do is to - for a moment - imagine it was in government. If we were in government and the fight to save the pound was lost - how would we prepare to adopt the Euro, when we know that it would be a disaster for the country and the economy? How does one prepare their own economic decline and ruin?

I have no doubt that this government will make moves to adopt the Euro at some point in the future - but even they say now is not the time to adopt it. If the Labour Party, who are the most likely to become pro-Euro, are saying that, even they themselves are not prepared to deal with a vote in favour of the Euro, and that the economy is not prepared for such a vote - how can we expect them to do what we would not be prepared to do? It would be like watching a nation busily engaged in heaping up its own funeral pyre.

My secondary concern is that I do not expect a vote against the Euro now to be a vote against for ever. Whilst it would politically suicidal for a government to ignore the will of the people, it is not impossible. It may not even be this Government that does it. It may not be done for another five or ten years - but a vote against the Euro now does not necessarily prevent moves to adopt it in the future.

I can already hear the excuses now - "the economy wasn't ready which is why people voted against it", "people didn't understand what they were voting for" "as the economy is ready now, people need a second vote", ad nauseum.

I would much rather see a referendum lock which would force a referendum on any changes to our relationship with the EU - the one thing we cannot do is to risk our economy, and I urge every MP here - within my own party - and across Parliament - to vote against this motion, as the risks of a failed economy far outweigh the benefits of holding a referendum.
Charles Trenython
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2020 11:04 am
Constituency: Burton
XP: 3
Trait(s): None
Discord username: axocja#6492

Re: M-02: Conditional Referendum on the Single Currency

Post by Charles Trenython »

Madam Speaker,

I thank the Honourable Member for Eastwood for bringing this debate before the House, and in my first remarks in this House as Foreign Sevcretary, and like my colleagues on this side of the House, I must oppose its sentiments in every way. I thank colleagues, the Right Honourable Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston and the Right Honourable Member for Glasgow-Maryhill for their remarks; I must echo those sentiments in full before proceeding with my own.

This Governments’ position has been absolutely clear from the outset. We outlined, and have since 1997, had the same position; that five tests are to be met before we’d consider the remote possibility of joining the Euro. These tests are not ambiguous in their nature, have clear intentions and criteria which we feel are crucial to the stability and prosperity of the economy of the United Kingdom. These are not tests to hide behind, these are examples of principled and analytical Governance, something which was not displayed by the Conservatives in the infancy of the ERM and don’t just represent ‘some political project’ where we are focused on ‘political consideration’. The matter of a currency seems to be political, not economical to the Conservative Party which speaks volumes to me, Madam Speaker, because the Member of Chipping Barnet, the Leader of the Opposition, is trying to please his MPs rather than make his arguments based upon a true ideology or economic theory.

That sentiment, Mr Speaker, is what has disappointed me about this debate. For the Leader of the Opposition, whom we are so used to peddling hyperbole and sensationalism in the press, brings this behaviour to the House. This behaviour is not what we come to expect of a man wishing to be Prime Minister, and nor should the people of Britain. He talks about some form of ‘chaos’ which the Government has apparently created in his fantasy. The only chaos I can see is from the benches behind him. The Government has been consistent, resolute and principled in our stance: there will not be a whiff of a referendum unless the five tests are passed, and passed for a significant period of time. No Government can in good faith put a question to the people without having assessed the real impact. That isn’t the impact on the Labour Party, that isn’t the impact on the Conservative Party, that is the impact on real hard-working citizens of our Union. The Leader of the Opposition seems to be disregarding the fundamental principles of Government in that he forgets the Government needs to work for the many, not for the elite few. It is the Government's belief by forming the five tests mechanism we are best placed to do this.

Madam Speaker, one of the main reasons the Government outlined the notorious five-tests was responsible Governance by learning from the past. Less than a decade ago, the Conservative Government presided over one of the worst incidents of economic mismanagement seen in modern time. High inflation, high interest rates and declining labour productivity were the characteristics of the economy during the early 1990s, culminating in shambles that was Black Wednesday. That cost the British Government in the range of £4bn. That’s £4bn less for education, £4bn less for the National Health Service and £4bn less for defending the realm. I won’t take any lectures on economic policy from the Conservative Party as that was their biggest ‘political project’ with no economic substance.

Madam Speaker, I cannot sit by and let the responsible policy of Government be bound by irresponsible sentiments set out by this motion, designed to score points in a political arena where the stakes are so high. To rule out an outcome is irresponsible and to bind to a referendum without such consultation over a sustained period of time is reckless and gives us an insight into how out of touch this Conservative Party is. This Government is focused on Governing for all, building a better society based upon rigorous deliberations and facts, not hyperbole and damaging rhetoric like the Leader of the Opposition. To Members of this House, I urge you to vote against this motion.
CHARLES TRENYTHON MP | Labour MP for Burton
Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (2000-present)
Secretary of State for Defence (2000-present)
User avatar
Rebecca Flair
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:15 pm
Constituency: Westmorland and Lonsdale
XP: 0
Trait(s): None
Discord username: DylPickle

Re: M-02: Conditional Referendum on the Single Currency

Post by Rebecca Flair »

Madam Speaker,

I rise in this debate and thank the Honourable Member for Eastwood for bringing this issue to this House but I would be remiss if I did not add my voice to the growing condemnation of the Conservative Party's motives. Madam Speaker this motion is not before the House because the Conservative Party believe in democracy, they would be quite happy to never have the referendum and simply reject Euro membership out of hand, nor is this motion before the House because the Conservative Party believe in the Euro, as I have said they despise it and many in their party believe we should leave the European Union in its entirety. Madam Speaker what we have here is a daring gamble by the Shadow Foreign Secretary, her boss the Leader of the Opposition, and indeed the whole rancid Shadow Cabinet which is beginning to get quite a turnover in terms of personnel. It is quite clear that the Opposition are playing Parliamentary games to try and shift the division on Europe away from their own party and place it back on the Labour Party.

Madam Speaker many of us were in this Chamber when the legendary debacle between the Right Honourable Member for Sedgefield and the Right Honourable Member for Dunfermline East was ongoing about the Euro, but that fight pales into insignificance against the weight of history behind the Conservative Party's divisions on Europe. Lord Major threatened to dissolve his Government because of how bad the divisions on the Maastricht Treaty had gotten, Baroness Thatcher was toppled because she sent her own Foreign Secretary into Europe having "broken all the bats" before her batsman had gone to crease, and now Mr Croft is attempting to paper over those same divisions to save his own neck. Madam Speaker this is a desperate ploy, almost as desperate as triggering a vote of no confidence in one's self simply because one MP has resigned from the position the Leader of the Opposition appointed him to and leaked the Leader of the Opposition's first pick for Chancellor's budget plans to the press. The Liberal Democrats will not be drawn into the Conservative Party's psychodrama on Europe and will consider the fate of the single currency on its merits, not its utility to the civil war brewing on the benches to my right.

Madam Speaker that is not to say that the Government have been spotless either. The three tests are a clear attempt to triangulate a path betwixt and between their liberal voters in the south and their more eurosceptic voters in the north while allowing them to fall back with a "position" that tells us nothing about their intention. Is the Labour Party in favour of the Euro? Nobody can tell us that except the Labour Party, and even they can't tell us with a straight face. The Home Secretary comes from a proud ideological tradition that believes we shouldn't even be a member of the European Union, the Chancellor has made a career in part out of being a strong advocate for joining the Euro, with clowns to the left and jokers to the right it's no wonder that the Prime Minister refuses to touch the issue until there is no choice for her but to. A fire that burns brightly burns quickly, so while the Conservative Party's civil war takes up all the oxygen in the room it should not escape the attention of the House that the Labour Party's own civil war is smoking in the corner, ready to combust the moment that there is even a hint of a flicker of flame. Convictions have never mattered to New Labour beyond electability, I urge them to rediscover their convictions and actually stake out a position on the Euro rather than simply hiding behind Five Tests that can say pretty much anything you want them to say depending on how you phrase the question.

Madam Speaker on my right we have violent civil war, in front of me we have quiet brooding, the Liberal Democrats at least know where we stand. We are proud Brits, we are proud patriots, but we are also proud Europeans. The Euro is a tremendous opportunity for our nation to take further advantage of our privileged position as the financiers of Europe and the second largest economy on the continent while also retaining those identities that make us so uniquely privileged on the World stage. The United Kingdom is a world leader in soft power, from our leadership position in NATO to our permanent seat on the United Nations, and yes our position in Europe. Leaving altogether as the hard left and the hard right want would do nothing but damage the British national interest on the World stage but staying half in and half out as the Leader of the Opposition would prefer would leave us precisely that, on the periphery. People in this House complain, and it is always the same complaint, that the EU exists to support German manufacturers and French farmers, then when something like the single currency comes along, something that could change all that, they opt for glum silence and rejection. The Liberal Democrats believe in Britain, we believe that we will make a success out of the single currency, and we believe that the Euro is best for the nation. I call on both the Government and the Opposition to actually decide where they stand on this most important of issues.
Rebecca Flair
MP for Westmorland and Lonsdale 2010 - Present

Leader of the Liberal Democrats 2015 - Present
Locked

Return to “Hansard”