Why I believe in an EU Referendum

On Monday, there was a backbench motion in Parliament, expressing an opinion about a possible three-way referendum on the European Union.

It was a very very tough decision, but I voted against it.

First: it would be better a referendum were held when the UK's economic crises has been sorted.

In the current economic climate, when people are fearful for their jobs and are struggling to keep their head above water, now would not be the best time to win a referendum on getting our powers back from the EU - or even push through the necessary legislation in the House of Commons. There would be a strong liklihood that we would lose such a referendum now, because people are understandably preoccupied with our economic difficulties.

Many people are worried that at a time when we are having to freeze pay for nurses and Police officers, how can it be right to spend £80 million pounds on a referendum?

Second: there was a guarantee from the Prime Minister that we will have a Referendum if there were any serious future changes to the European Union. Unlike the Motion on the Referendum, this commitment has already been enshrined in legislation by the Government through the 2011 EU Sovereignty Act - which I strongly supported.

This is more than likely given the current problems in the Eurozone.

David Cameron confirmed in Parliament this week, that there will be a referendum if there was any fundamental changes to the EU.

He said:

"The key point about the European Union Act 2011 and the referendum lock that we put in place is that any passage of powers from Britain to Brussels results in a referendum. That is the key thing that we have delivered, which means that never again can we have a situation where, as with Maastricht or Lisbon, a treaty is passed that transfers powers from this House to somewhere else without the British people being asked first. I sometimes think that we have lost the ability to make clear what a significant change that is. That is the key thing that the referendum lock delivers, and I think everyone on this side of the House can be very proud of it"

Third: During the debate both David Cameron and William Hague pledged to repatriate powers from Europe.

William Hague said:

"It is my view and the Prime Minister’s view, and the position of the Conservative Party, that we will use future opportunities to bring further powers back to the United Kingdom—to repatriate powers to the United Kingdom in those areas where we believe European integration has gone too far... The only treaty change agreed so far—I am coming to this point—is the one that puts the European stability mechanism on a legal basis, and for that we secured in return, as the Prime Minister explained, that this country will no longer be forced to be part of eurozone bail-outs. We will respond to every proposal by putting forward what we need in return. Any treaty that transfers power to the European Union, and that is interpreted not just by Ministers but by the courts of this country as doing so, will result in a referendum for the people of the United Kingdom."

Further to this I should like to make some concluding points.

I was not forced to vote for the Government because of the Whips or anyone else. On other occasions I have voted against the Government and voted against the EU Budget increase last year, despite a three line whip. After listening to the debate, I decided late into the evening to back the Government - for the reasons given above.

It is also worth noting that the Backbench Motion was non-binding - purely because it was a Backbench Motion.

This meant that it amounted to an expression of opinion rather than 'forcing' the Government to do anything. In other words, even if it had passed there would have been no Referendum.

I do support a general referendum on our relations with the EU, but believe this should be a commitment in the next Tory Manifesto. I would be happy either for a referendum on substantial renegotiation and repatriation of our powers, either before the Government went to the EU to begin negotiations, or, after renegotiation of our membership had been completed - in order to gain a mandate from the British people.

As I have said however, given that there is likely to be a new EU Treaty in the near future, it is likely that referendum will come sooner rather than later.



by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

General Election Day Seven: Its a beautiful country...

So said a Lady to me when campaigning around Bush Fair today. It got me thinking, yes there are some terrible things going on, and we have a broken society, yet there are still wonders to behold. Our countryside, outstanding landscapes, wildlife, natural habitat, great buildings, monuments, art and culture. Yes, Britain is a great place to be. I admired this lady's optimism and good heart, even though she was angry at how our country had been governed over the past few years.

I went to visit a number of small businesses as well (such as Joy's Flowers), as I wanted to find out what they thought of the economic situation. Their answers were somewhat gloomy. Accompanying me was, Dan Lucia, Conservative caseworker for Bush Fair, and Council Candidate. Dan's indefatigable cheer was a great lifter of spirits and I was glad to go canvassing on Bush Fair doorsteps later. He is getting a lot of support. I was really struck by what one resident said on the doorstep:

"I don't mind so much what the policies are, as long as politicians are honest".

His concern was more that I would be an an honest MP if elected, than what was in the Tory Manifesto. He added that if he voted for me, and I let him down, he would chase me up and down Harlow. I have no doubt that he would too. Its definitely true that elections bring out the wisdom of the people. Once every few years, the public have power in their hands to say yes or no. Campaigning and canvassing is a good reminder of who are the servants and who are the masters. The problem with Mr G. Brown, is that he and his Government has forgotten which is which.

P.S. As the picture shows, I was pleased to go to the excellent Cafe Pizzeria and have a good chat, with owner Mehmet. I also enjoyed an excellent mushroom omelette.

by Robert Halfon - www.roberthalfon.blogspot.com

Cajun Squirrel Crisps and Democracy

As a Prospective MP, I don't get any salary or expenses, so I also have a full time job in London. Driving home I usually pass through City Airport via the Limehouse Link and often stop at an Esso Garage by the airport to fill up and have a cup of coffee.

Although I am on a diet, I often can't resist a packet of crisps and recently bought one of Walker's new special flavours - Cajun Squirrel. As I drove back Harlow way, I got thinking as to whether I would vote for this flavour or my own favourite - Fish and Chips. And then, being a politician I started to think about Walker's Crisps and politics......

What is the biggest vote currently facing the nation? Is it the local elections? The European elections. Fat chance. Does the answer lies in crisp packets?

In the old days, when a company wanted to develop a new product they might have a few boffins create the idea, followed by focus groups and some marketing here and there. After, the new product would appear on the supermarket shelves. It would succeed by its advertising and by a bit of luck.

Walkers Crisps have turned this approach on its head. Instead of centrally announcing a new flavour of crisps to a munching public, the company invited people to send in recipes which were then voted on - by the public via the text or internet. The winning flavours were reduced to just six.

The company then released these six flavours onto the market and, as crisp lovers will know, are available at most outlets. But Walkers didn't stop there at this exercise in crisp democracy. Every packet bought carries a coloured rosette and allows you to vote (again by text or internet) as to which of the six flavours is preferred. The intention is that after the voting ends, Walkers will introduce the extra flavour based on the voting public's final say so.

I expect many political die-hards will watch Walker's Crisp Democracy with cynicism at another marketing exercise. Yet the truth is that more people will know about this Crisp vote than who their MEP is or local MP for that matter.

So what is the lesson for political parties? Why not try and involve the voting public in decision making much more. Instead of centrally announcing policies, why not invite the public to suggest some as long as they are broadly in line with party principles. Get the public to vote the best ones and then use pilot schemes to try them out.

Want a new bypass? Send in your suggestions fully costed - let people then vote on the best suggestion - fully aware of the cost implications and the increase in local taxes.

Worried about a local hospital closing or a particular ward or department shutting down? Offer people a vote, again noting just what the cost implications are. If they want to keep the hospital open, they have choice of paying an extra xxx on their local council taxes.

I appreciate that the above may be too far reaching and too revolutionary in these difficult times, but it is worth mentioning the above to stimulate debate. The voting public are no longer willing subjects content to vote once every five years. They want real engagement and involvement at every level. Walkers Crisp democracy has shown the way forward.

P.S I still prefer Fish and Chips flavour - I have never tasted squirrel before and had nothing to compare it with!!

Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device