Trust in politics is endangered by Brown's broken referendum promise, says Hague

William Hague will address the Centre for Policy Studies at lunchtime today.  He will warn that Gordon Brown's failure to grant a referendum on the EU treaty is a breach of trust that is dangerous for faith in the whole political system:

"An overwhelming majority of the British people want a referendum, more than eighty per cent in one recent poll. The TUC have voted for a referendum and the Prime Minister is faced with growing calls for one from his backbenches, including two former Europe ministers. This is not an issue that is going to go away, nor should it. As Northern Rock has lately shown in a textbook example, every system of human interaction is ultimately based on trust. If that trust goes the system will break down. The way Gordon Brown has disregarded his promise of a referendum is a dangerous thing for politics as a whole.  That is why the Conservative Party is not afraid of addressing this matter. It is too important to be nodded through on the sly. Because it goes to the heart of the questions of trust, accountability and the health of our democracy. If that is an old agenda then the politics of disenchantment will only worsen. It is, in fact, at the heart of a central agenda for Britain today: to restore the health of our democracy."

Earlier today David Cameron emailed Tory activists across the country with an encouragement to sign the IWantAReferendum petition.  Of the Treaty he wrote:

"The fact is that the new Treaty is basically the same as the Constitution and it means giving away more powers to the EU.  It would create a new EU president and lead to the loss of at least 60 of our national vetoes. It gives the EU the power to make treaties and introduces a new ratchet clause that would make it easier for the EU to taken on even more powers in the future."

Samuel Coates was at the event and has provided additional reporting below...

Hague got the first of several laughs when introducing the speech saying that normally parties are quiet when one of the other parties is having another conference, but as there was "nothing of interest at all" in the LibDem one he thought he'd better say something (hold the press - I've just seen on the news that they've had a vote on food packaging!). He also spoke of "the strange case of Ming Campbell" who is "helping his old friend Gordon" out by taking "three completely positions on a question of national importance within a week", an achievement "even by the standards of the Liberal Democrats". These digs made even the media chuckle.

The headline theme was that political disengagement in this country is as a result of decision-making powers being spread unaccountably across quangos, different levels of Government and international institutions, something even the Power Inquiry recognised. From this premise, Hague attacked Brown for exacerbating this lack of trust in the political process by his "bizarre" and "baffling" breaking of the promise for a referendum.

Hague outlined some specific remedies to the EU's "democratic disconnection" that could be implemented in Parliament:

• Acting on Theresa May's proposals for a powerful new European Scrutiny Committee in Parliament modelled on the Danish Europaudvalge
• Making the Scrutiny Reserve statutory so Ministers can't dodge the ESC like they have 346 times since 2001
• Setting a fixed timetable for scrutiny of EU legislation so the ESC and even Select Committees have sufficient time
• Changing the Standing Orders of the House so that a "substantial minority" of MPs can force a vote on any EU measure considered by the ESC
• Introducing Oral Parliamentary Questions directly to the Minister of Europe

The only line of attack against the party's position with any potency is to dismiss it as "lurching to the right" in reaction to bad opinion polls. The BBC's Carole Walker did try this tired line but Hague rightly rubbished the link between the polls and his speech. In an echo of Cameron's false choice speech one of the first things he said was that concern about the growing power of the EU is "not a soley Conservative concern", as Labour's Tony Wright has said:

"Even for someone who is well-disposed towards the European Union, there is no question that there are huge democratic issues associated with it and, whatever we might say, we know that the idea of democratic Europe is not really one that we can sustain."

There wasn't anything new in terms of substance in the speech but it was a convincing speech that pulled together a number of damning quotes about the constitution and provided a useful summary of why we should have the opportunity to vote against it. It's clear that Hague (the Chief Whip has apparently asked MPs to leave all the talking on this to him) is going to keep running with this issue as it really puts Brown into a corner. Expect more at conference.

Comments

[Chad Noble]

Why do we want a referendum?

It's not really because NewLab pledged it, or because it is the right thing to democratically,is it? It is because we oppose the unstoppable EU train to political integration.

But who really believes that a 'no' vote here will stop this (rather than merely delay things a while)?

That is why the real question is not about the constitution but about our continued membership of an organisation that everyone (except those in denial) will acknowledge is seeking ever greater political union.

In or Out is the honest question, and any referendum on the constitution will not stop the project but just reduce the public's appetite to have another referendum in the future on membership itself.

For me, a referendum on the constitution will only *prolong* our membership of the EU as the result will not make the slighest material difference.

Bizarrely, for the wrong reasons, it is now the LibDems who are proposing the right referendum. If we don't think we can fight our corner and win, then I really don't think we have any reason to complain, but what is the point in fighting for a referendum that won't achieve anything but perhaps short-term bragging rights?

[Alex Swanson]

It is absolutely the case that politicians making claims which the public know are untrue damage trust in our democratic system.

So, Mr Hague, when are you and your colleagues going to admit that the 1997 handgun ban was pointless? Hundreds of thousands of people already know this and the rest are waking up to it; late, and slowly, but it will happen.

Ed, I make no apology for raising this topic again. The right to bear arms is the cornerstone of a free democracy, and a politician who denies it is a would-be tyrant. The claim that intolerant firearms laws improve public safety is the biggest lie we have been fed for decades, and it is promulgated as enthusiastically by the Conservative front bench as by anyone else.

[Dave Bartlett]

That's right Chad, get your submission in before the fight. Always a winning plan.

[Chad Noble]

Huh? (Dave 13:05) - I'm calling for the *big* fight over membership not some sideshow referendum that will achieve nothing material.

Even accepting that the dice will be loaded against, and dirty tricks will be abundant, I am confident the withdrawalists will win, but we need the opportunity!

[TomTom]

Hague is playing games. Why not state that one Conservative policy that can be made public now is a Referendum of the EU and/or its Constitution whenever a Conservative Administration is able to effect such ?

If they are so afraid of Labour stealing their ideas if they publish a Manifesto - let Labour steal the Referendum idea

[Christina]

I have 3 words for Mr Hague: "weeks, not months."

[True Blue]

A referendum on "Europe, in or out?" would destroy the Conservative party and result in a victory for the status quo. It was a clever tactical move by Ming to suggest such a referendum.

I wish contributors would get into their heads that you might care about Europe, but most people don't think it's important at all. They grumble about it, but that's it.

UKIP provides a home for conservative-minded people who want to leave the EU. It will certainly not be Conservative policy in the foreseeable future.

[Dave Bartlett]

@Chad Noble 13:10

A referendum on EU membership isn't on the cards, a referendum on the EU constitution is. Your response to that is: "the result will not make the slightest material difference", or 'give up without a fight'.

If you actually do want the UK to with withdraw from the EU then the first step is to stop the constituition. The first action is to sign up to the 'I Want a Referendum' campaign. It will take about two minutes, and won't cost you a penny.

[activist]

I count one single Conservative on this thread so far, other than myself.

Polls show overwhelming support for having a referndum and NO to the Constitution, and also very strong support for staying in the EU but repatriating powers, as Cameron suggests.

The "in or out" is not what most voters want. Like Maggie and the rebate, Tories don't accept that change can't happen. Give us a referendum, and reform the bloated EU (and I really hope the ukippers aren't allowed to hijack this thread - they want to fight and lose instead of fight and win!)

[Letters From A Tory]

The Conservatives are right to pursue this, but they are seriously running the risk of becoming a one-trick pony if this is the best they've got.

[Chad Noble]

"A referendum on EU membership isn't on the cards, a referendum on the EU constitution is"

Have the Tories unequivocally pledged to hold a referendum in the next parliament if they win the general election (and there has not been one) Dave?

[RobD]

In or Out is not the question most of the population want, it is the argument the fringes of both sides want but no one else.

Hague is correct to keep pushing this, and if an autumn election is called it could be our best hope of winning. (It is actually the reason I don't think Brown will have the balls to call an election)

[Dave Bartlett]

@ Chad Nobel 14:56

"Have the Tories unequivocally pledged to hold a referendum in the next parliament if they win the general election (and there has not been one) Dave?"

Yes. Mr Cameron was explicit in his Telegraph TV interview. But it's important to stop the constitution being passed NOW. Which is CCHQ are encouraging us to sign up to the 'I Want a Referendum' campaign. I have, I hope you will too.

[Johnny]

"Trust in politics is endangered by Brown's broken referendum promise, says Hague"
This statement just goes to show how far the governors are removed from the governed. Completley divorced from the real world whilst sitting in their ivory towers with only focus groups tp provide them with further detachment. Trust us on this - there is no trust to begin with.

[Janice Small]

Mostly valid comment. There are 3 ways to raise the issue:

1.Join activists in Kent this Saturday, 22nd September - all welcome - not just Tories.

Rochester: 10.30am, St Joseph’s Maths School, Maidstone Rd, ME1 3EL
Maidstone: 1.30pm, town centre corner of Week St/Fremlin Walk, outside Marks & Spencer
Deal: 4pm High Street
Ramsgate: 5pm corner of Queen, Harbour and King Streets
Contact me: http://www.janicesmall.co.uk/Europe1.htm

2.Sign up to www.iwantareferendum.com
3.Go on the London march for a referendum on 27th October - details available via the above or The Freedom Association's website

[Mike White]

Has anyone noticed how many socialist think tanks are lined up to speak in Blackpool at fringe neetings ?

Something to consider.

Sean Gabb - Enemy Class
What I will call the Enemy Class exists in and around thepublic sector. It comprises the great majority of thoseadministrators, lawyers, experts, educators and mediapeople whose living is connected with the State. Its lead-ing members are people like Anthony Giddens, GregDyke, Elspeth Howe, Mary Warnock, Polly Toynbee,Peter Mandelson, and others. They articulate and ad-vance the interests of perhaps a million other people —from television producers and heads of executive agen-cies, down through the university lecturers and socialworkers and white collar bureaucrats, to the lowestgrades of civil servant and local government officer. Addto the list all the racism awareness and anti-aids consult-ants and the workers in those non-government organis-ations that receive money and status from or via theState.
These are the people who really govern the country.They are the ones who decide what statistics to gatherand how and when to publish them. They decide whatproblems can be identified and what solutions can be dis-cussed. They advise on policy and implement policy.Because of their numbers and education and beliefs, andthe formal and informal bonds that hold them to eachother, and because of their ability and willingness to giveand withhold benefits, they set the tone of society.

[Radical Tory]

Mike White - Sean Gabb is a libertarian not a socialist. I don't quite see your point.

[michael mcgough]

"Have the Tories unequivocally pledged to hold a referendum in the next parliament if they win the general election (and there has not been one) Dave?"

Yes. Mr Cameron was explicit in his Telegraph TV interview.

I would disagree.As regards an October election yes,but further than that I felt he did not commit.Perhaps the Editor could seek clarification as this fundamentally affects the way many will vote.

[Helen]

"Give us a referendum, and reform the bloated EU (and I really hope the ukippers aren't allowed to hijack this thread - they want to fight and lose instead of fight and win!)"

Not a UKIPper. Definitely not guilty there. But I would like to know how Activist envisages that reform of the EU. What methods, what institutions, what organizations are to be used? The European Council, the Commission, the European Parliament, an IGC, the Treaties? Do tell us. We'd all like to know.

[Dave Bartlett]

@Helen 18:20

It seems that the EU parliament is becoming increasingly eurosceptic, but, as I understand it, the Council sets the agenda. So we need our national leaders, PM in the UK, pushing for a return of EU powers to national parliaments. Mr Cameron has repeatedly called for that.

[Alex Swanson]

'I count one single Conservative on this thread so far, other than myself.'

Go on then, name a name. And then tell us how you know everybody else isn't.

[Tony Makara]

Gordon Brown's duplicity is shocking. It also tells us a lot about the man and the way he thinks politics should be conducted.

Gordon Brown can kill this argument dead by argeeing to hold the refrendum that Labour promised at the last election. A pledge they were elected on. The fact that Brown won't hold a refrendum tells us two things. One, that Gordon Brown knows he would lose such a referendum, and two, that he does not trust the judgement of the British people.

William Hague is right. Gordon Brown's condescending attitude will turn even more people away from the political process. However for a man whose lifeblood is top-down politics, maybe that is exactly what Gordon Brown wants.

[Cleo]

Going on about Europe is not going to win the election.

[Edison Smith]

Going on about Europe is not going to win the election.

No, but using it as a line of attack will help, alongside the more 'cuddly' areas.

If for nothing else, because Brown has broken a promise.

And I'm a Cameroon, so you can't accuse me of being the usual bring-back trad Tory.

[Richard Tyndall]

Sean Gabb is about as far from a socialist as one can possibly get. I would strongly recommend his book "How the Conservatives Lost England and How to Get it Back".

He is a classic Libertarian with views which are diametrically opposed to those of Toynbee or Mandelson.

[James Maskell]

Does Mike White even know who Sean Gabb is? Mike White, check out the Libertarian Alliance website for more information on his views. You are very, very wrong.

[Steve Green]

Gordon Brown was accused yesterday of "control freakery". It seems that a large number of motions submitted to the Labour party conference have been ruled out of order. Of 120 contemporary resolutions submitted by constituency parties and unions, 96 were ruled out of order by the Conference Arrangements Committee. They include motions on Iraq and the Trident nuclear weapons system.

John McDonnell, the Labour MP for Hayes and Harlington, said: "This closing down of debate within the Labour Party by Brown's imposition of such centralised control is cutting him off from the debates of party members and the concerns of the population at large."

This is from Gordon's recent speech: "Many will recall that when taking office I emphasised that the government must listen and learn. Now I say we must do more. We must engage and involve with people on the issues they face in their everyday lives. I believe that Britain needs a new type of politics which embraces everyone in this nation, not just a select few. A politics built on consensus, not division. A politics built on engaging with people, not excluding them. A politics that draws on the widest range of talents and expertise, not the narrow circles of power."

Nice words Gordon but I think you will only discuss subjects that you are in control of. You are closing down debate even within your own party. In truth, what you have to say in the above quote from your recent speech is just a pack of spin and lies.

[bank economist]

The orchestrated attempt by Gordon Brown to scapegoat Mervyn King over Northern Rock is disgraceful.

If anyone should be in the dock it's:

1. Hector Santi at the FSA who allowed NR to lower their lending standards last year,

2. The NR executives who caried out this reckless business model,

3 Gordon Brown, who's hand is behind everything.

King, quite rightly, didn't want to bale out a corrupt and failing bank with a blank cheque of taxpayers money but he was over-ruled by Brown who is now trying to destroy him.

Vince Cable of the LibDems has today spoken out in King's defence. Are we going to hear from George Osborne or has he gone back to sleep?

[James Maskell]

Unfortunately our leadership backed the Government over this. I feel King was pushed into that action through the threat of not being given another term in the Governor role and I hope he does well in Parliament today in setting the record straight. He was right to resist the easy (and in my view the wrong) path of giving businesses justification for reckless decisions on their part. Banks now know that they are safe no matter what they do. The Government cant risk the political implications of queues outside banks like that.

Cameron and Osbornes failure to slam the Government for forcing the Bank to back down like that shows the lack of balls necessary to make the hard decisions.

[BLACKDAY]

HERE WE GO AGAIN SOME ONE ELSE BEING MADE A SCAPEGOAT FOR ANOTHER NU LABOUR DISASTER.IF WHEN BROWN ANNOUCED THE BANK OF ENGLAND WAS BEING GIVEN AN INDEPENDENT HAND.THE PEOPLE THAT BELEIVED IT MUST BELEIVE IN FAIRYTALES.LIKE HIS BIG DISCUSSIONS WITH JOE PUBLIC IT WILL GIVE HIM MORE WRIGGLE ROOM WHEN THINGS HIT THE FAN.BROWN KNOWS THAT THE ONLY THING THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY THINK ABOUT IS HIGHER HOUSE PRICES.THAT WAY THEY CAN BUY BIGGER CARS AND GO ON EXOTIC HOLLIDAYS.MEANWHILE LENDING COMPANIES CAN DISH OUT PEOPLES MONEY TO THOSE THAT CANNOT AFFORD TO LIVE WELL BEYOND THEIR MEANS.THE BANKS AND OTHER LENDERS DISH OUT EVEN MORE MONEY KNOWING THAT WHEN THEY GET INTO TROUBLE OUR TAXES WILL BAIL THEM OUT.WHEN THE COUNTRIES WE OWE BILLIONS TO THAT WERE BORROWED TO FINANCE THIS HOUSE OF CARDS.HIKE THEIR BORROWING RATES .IT WILL NOT BE THE POLITITIANS OR THE CITY WISE GUYS OR EVEN THE BANKS.IT WILL JOE PUBLIC HOLDING THE CAN.

[Editor]

No capitals in future please BLACKDAY - they're for me to use when I overwrite undesirable comments.
:-)