PC 6: Let the People Vote?

[Ege]

I would like to thank William Croft for putting the Euro referendum policy on a conference vote. It will be an invigorating debate and I look forward to it.

[Sir Dylan Macmillan]

For all of their talk about mandates, listening to the people, and putting issues to a vote the hardcore europhobes are very much intransigent to listening to a) the 53% of party members who voted for William Croft campaigning on this issue and b) the 100% of the electorate who have never been asked about the Euro full stop. You don't get to pick and choose which mandates you listen to, it is time to have a referendum and put the cases to the British people for their decision, not the decision of ideologues of either side.

[Will Frost]

Desperate not to consult with the British people on their euro plans, the Government's new line is that they won't allow for a referendum until their "economic tests," show that adoption would be a good thing for Britain. But what objective "test" could possibly show that giving up control of our interest rates, surrendering our sovereignty to Brussels, and tying ourselves to unstable economies would be a good thing for Britain? We know the outcome is going to be negative, so why does the Government insist on keeping the door open to the possibility of adopting the euro? If the Government was seriously concerned about promoting economic stability, they would rule out the euro altogether.

Barring that, they should give all of us the certainty we deserve by allowing the British people to vote in a referendum as soon as possible, to once and for all rule out ever adopting the single currency.

[Brown]

Sorry Mr. Croft, this isn't a "new line", it was in our manifesto and, unlike the Conservative party, Labour stands behind its clearly stated manifesto commitment. The only party that can not seem to keep a single, straight message on this issue is the Conservative party. Perhaps Conservatives should obtain copies of their manifesto and read it before inaccurately characterizing ours. I look forward to discovering what the Conservative party's position will be on this issue after their conference.

[John Baker]

The Labour party is espousing their 5 tests as the end all be all; however they might want to relook at the questions because they are indeed quite vague and open to interpretation, so let's give an evaluation of them, we'll start with the first one, "[a]re business cycles and economic structures compatible so that we and others could live comfortably interest rates on a permanent basis." So what metrics are used to qualify that the economic structures and business cycle are going to be comfortable with the interest rates on a long term basis. From my perspective that's trying to answer a case study best taken over a twenty year period and decided that the Euro would've been a good idea, but it's not truly a metric we could decide at any one point in time and it would always remain true. That is a question that has to be answered though several cycles each of which take a few years to get through. Also with Economic structures what is our goal, is it make the new economic structures to push the UK to being ready to adopt the Euro or is it to build the structures to keep the pound? I think it's time to figure out whether or not our goal is to join the Euro, and use these questions as the metric for when we join the Euro. Because if we aren't converging our structures then we'll never be ready for the Euro. The treasury concluded in 1997 that their exist many fundamental differences between the UK and the rest of the EU's market structure, specifically on Housing. Meaning that before we get the question of the Euro in Labour's mind we need to adjust the housing market, why can't we know if the people want to join the Euro before we make anymore wide changing adjustments to our economy. Shouldn't we know what our goal is before we make these adjustments? It's time that Labour stop hiding behind the vague 5 questions and for them to let Britain decide if we want to keep the pound or join the Euro. So that we can move forward with what the people want, instead of the flip-flopping priorities of Labour. We should use these metrics only if the British Public votes on the matter!

[Will Frost]

When I ran for the leadership of the Conservative Party, I made it clear that I was a conviction politician and that I would always do what I believed to be right. I intend to stay true to that commitment, and to act on the policies and ideas within the manifesto that I was elected on. I am fighting to give the British people a chance to reject the euro in the referendum because I believe it is the right thing to do, and because I believe the Conservative Party should trust that the British people will make the right choice. It is wrong for our party to say that we know the euro is wrong for Britain, but then turn around and act as if we don't trust the British people's ability to come to this conclusion on their own. I trust the British people, I believe in their ability to make decisions for themselves, and I am confident that they will recognize the euro for the economically ruinous project that it is.

Us Conservatives have a duty to empower choice and to ensure the British people are firmly in control of their own destiny, and that is why pursuing this referendum is of fundamental importance to me. If the Government will not rule out joining the euro, the Conservatives must fight to let the British people secure a mandate against adoption.

[Will Frost]

I know that there are some within my own party who remain unconvinced of my approach. That, despite the 53% of members who voted in favor of my candidacy and my platform, there remains uncertainty about my belief that offering a referendum would be the best way to ensure Britain never adopts the euro. My belief is simple: often the most daring proposals end up providing the greatest security, and that could not be more true than in the case of the euro. The British people know what is good for them, and no amount of New Labour-engineered "tests" can change that. The people know that the euro compromises our sovereignty, undermines the British economy, and is inconsistent with the values of a proudly independent nation.

If it radical to believe that the British people know what is best for this country, then I am more than happy to be deemed a radical. Because this approach, "radical" or not, is the most practical way of defeating the pro-euro campaign once and for all.

[John Baker]

The second question is directly a question that requires us to work with our economy and economic structure to be able to achieve, and working with Europe to adapt the Euro. The question "If problems emerge is there sufficient flexibility to deal with them?" is not one that can be simply just prepared for on the whim that the UK might join. We need to adapt our economy and the European Central Bank institutions to handle the United Kingdom on the Euro. This test is another one specifically designed for the Flip flopping nature of Labour's position on the Euro. The flexibility won't exist until we actually start working to achieve it, so if we never achieve it than Labour never has to say they want to move towards the Euro. Or if they desire to push us towards the Euro they can simply say that it exists. The test has no clear metrics, no clear things to look out for to check their work. Clearly Labour is going to hide behind the treasury and continue to refuse to take action until the absolute last minute. The Conservative's policy of having the referendum before the "tests" are met is better than either doing nothing and pretending we are pro-euro, or making massive economic changes and then finding out that the British public does not want the Euro. We must decide first if we are moving towards the Euro before making the changes needed to adopt the Euro. Labour wants to make the changes before knowing if we are really moving towards the Euro. If they reject M-2, they are clearly going to proceed with getting the country ready for the Euro and put the question to the people when it is already too late.

[Sir Jack Anderson]

It seems that in a desperate attempt to deflect from their own intra party drama, the Conservatives have taken to conspiracy theory. As I said, the Treasury rejects dragging our business cycles or housing market to meet the five tests. That would be disruptive and unwise. It is Conservative MPs, not Labour ones, that have demanded this.

Secondly, the five tests are approved by the International Monetary Fund. We will be sticking to them so we can navigate the big question of the euro while also safeguarding jobs and businesses. This is an approach that has the approval not just of economic minds, but of Conservative backbenchers who called our approach "right" and have now forced William Croft to have to submit to a policy where he'll reject having a referendum altogether.

The Conservatives cannot complain of uncertainty when their leader stated a position and, after backlash from his own party, has admitted he may need to change tact if his members vote against him and reject his own policy altogether. William Croft's weakness and the Tory Party's division would be an unmitigated disaster for Britain.

[Will Frost]

Labour is fundamentally divided over Europe, as evidenced by the epic battles between Tony Blair and his Chancellor that eventually brought about Blair's demise. Those battles carry on today, with MPs in the Socialist Campaign Group vocally opposed to the Government's support for the euro. On the other hand, the Conservatives are unified by our manifesto commitment to oppose adoption of the single currency. Our party is united behind my platform, which a majority of Conservative members backed in the leadership election. If it makes Jack Anderson feel better to imagine that my party is somehow "divided," well that's fine by me.

But the reality is this: Britain is suffering because of New Labour's indecision over how to approach the pound, and because they are guided solely by a desire to do what will maximize their political fortunes. The Government was seemingly prepared to take us into the single currency in 1999, and it wasn't these 5 tests that stopped them: it was negative public perception towards the euro. Jack Anderson can fall back on these tests and his faux concern for the economy all he wants, but the reality is that he backs the pound and intends to ensure the UK adopts it. He feels he knows what is best for the British people, but he has no intention of allowing them to decide that for themselves. This is classic, classic New Labour.

My position might appear radical to those, in Labour and in my party, who are uncomfortable with putting the British people in charge of their democracy. Frankly, I don't care. My job isn't to placate every politician who desperately clings to power and the comfort of the status quo, but to shake things up and empower the people to break the logjam on this issue. The Government is not doing our economy any favors but wavering over the decision of how and when to adopt the euro, and they certainly won't be doing the British people any favors when they inevitably move to adopt the euro and surrender our financial independence in the process. There is only one way forward: stop the excuses, stop the "we know best mentality," being espoused by the Westminster elite, and let the British people have the chance to determine their own future.