| Topic: | Re:Re:Ann Keen Votes against Labour Party Manifesto and her Democratic Mandate | |
| Posted by: | Peter John | |
| Date/Time: | 06/03/08 16:05:00 |
| In my view, five reasons. Firstly, as others have said, it's a manifesto commitment by all three big parties. It is possible to excuse politicians for breaking such a commitment if there is clearly a reason why it is impossible, or if circumstances have changed out of recognition, but that is not the case here. Secondly, public attitudes have changed in 15 years: my impression is that the public is much less deferential towards politicians and more confident in its own ability to make correct decisions. Thirdly, a long-ish debate on our place in Europe with all politicians committing to a position (in, out or semi-detached) is overdue. Britain has never really been clear what it wanted out of the EU, which some say produces -80% of our laws, let alone how to get it. As there may be no institutional reform for a while, this seems as good a chance as any to have such a debate. Fourth, you cite the precedent of Maastricht under a different government without a manifesto commitment, but don't forget that Labour held a referendum on whether there should be a mayor for Hartlepool - if that issue could not be decided in Parliament, why on earth can this one be? Fifth, various European politicians such as Merkel and d'Estaing have been quite open that this is the Constitution with a minimum of changes necessary to avoid further referenda (except in Ireland). Calling a referendum here would surely show that they cannot get away with this sort of fraud. Having one here would also probably mean that the Dutch and maybe the French, Swedish and Danish people would have to be consulted. Not exactly simple, I'm afraid. |