The Lib Dems played an absolutely crucial role in preventing a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty from taking place. In the leaders TV debate Nick Clegg had the cheek to complain that the Conservatives were no longer going to have a referendum on the Treaty - but the reason for this is that it is now in force and so legally that is too late. The question is why did a referendum not take place when there was still time?
The Conservatives proposed an amendment. Cast your eye down the list of those voting for it. There are some Labour MPs such as Ian Davidson even a few Lib Dems such as Alistair Carmichael. Good for them. But you won't notice Nick Clegg's name on the list. He whipped his MPs into abstaining. Those who did not agree were sacked as front bench spokesmen. As Churchill, with whom Clegg has been implausibly compared, once said:
"Decided only to be undecided, resolved to be irresolute, adamant for drift, solid for fluidity, all-powerful to be impotent."
But then when they were worried that abstaining might not be sufficient to scupper the referendum they voted against it in the House of Lords. Had the Lib Dems voted the other way the referendum would have been approved.
This was what Nick Clegg said on the subject before the last General Election:
The real reason, of course, why the government does not want to hold a referendum is the fear that it may lose... Nothing will do more damage to the pro-European movement than giving room to the suspicion that we have something to hide, that we do not have the ‘cojones’ to carry out our argument to the people”.
In terms of European policy a Lib/Lab Government would actually be worse that a majority Labour Government. (Something UKIP supporters might reflect on in their efforts to thwart a Conservative victory.)Clegg may make token criticisms of the EU over chocolate but he is a staunch defender of its power. This speech, for instance shows the extent that he is an opponent of change and an apologist for he status quo regarding the EU. It is a "common misinterpretation is the suggestion that the EU is somehow inimical to economic competitiveness and liberalisation." The European Commission "is an unusually transparent bureaucracy compared with other Administrations in other capitals."
Clegg was baffled by suggestion that rules were imposed on us:
The truth is that all European Union legislation is examined and scrutinised in depth by British civil servants, by British officials on the European Commission, by British Commissioners and by British Members of the European Parliament, and such legislation is always signed off in one shape or form by British Ministers in the Council of Ministers. How long should we persist in pretending that that process, in which we have a real stake, has nothing to do with us and that we do not share responsibility for decisions taken in our name in the EU?
He added:
On the myth of bureaucracy, listening to some hon. Members, one would think that the European Commission is a Goliath of unaccountable bureaucracy, but when I last looked, it was half the size of Birmingham city council. Listening to much of the debate, one would think that the European Union budget was out of control, but it is just more than 1 per cent. of EU GDP, while public spending in this country is fast approaching 40 per cent. of GDP, so the EU budget is comparatively very small indeed.
So really he only thing wrong with the EU is the need for more PR to tackle these "myths." This isn't a man who champions British interests in the EU. He is man interested in championing the EU's interests in Britain.
