|
|
|
| REFERENDUMS
HELD ON EUROPEAN MATTERS: 1
1975: EC Membership
(67,23 % Yes. 64,03 Turnout) |
| |
CONSTITUTIONAL
CONDITIONS - European
Communities Act 1972
Binding referendum requires a legal implementation as a part of
the ratification-process. Consultative referendum can anyhow be
held if ordered by ad-hoc-law (UK has no written constitution). |
| |
APPROVAL
OF EUROPEAN TREATIES
When the UK joined the Community, accession was preceded by the
passing of the European Communities Act 1972 which made the Treaty
and the law deriving from it applicable within the UK. Changes of
the European treaties that implicate constitutional changes for
the UK like the Maastricht Treaty are implemented by amending the
European Communities Act 1972.
APPROVAL
OF INTERNATIONAL TREATIES
Treaties are ratified by the Foreign Secretary, acting on the residual
authority of the Crown (Royal Prerogative). Parliament has no formal
role in treaty-making. Since the 1920’s there has been a constitutional
practice called “the Ponsonby Rule” which requires that
all treaties subject to ratification be laid before parliament for
information and debate. Under British constitutional practice, the
passage of the implementing legislation is not formally part of
ratification, but it must precede ratification. |
| |
RATING
AND DEBATE
Decided
During
the year 2003, Prime Minister Tony Blair expressed repeatedly his
unwillingness to hold a referendum on the EU Constitution, but he
was facing great pressure of pro-referendum campaigns, the oppositional
parties and the press. On 20 April 2004 he finally announced to
hold a referendum, which would be held in spring 2006.
The Labour party argued that the Constitution was necessary to speed
up decision making in an enlarged EU but the Tories said the treaty
would be "bad for Britain". In November, Michael Howard
said: "The Constitution will make Europe's economy even less
flexible, even less competitive and even more sluggish than it is
today." Opinion polls during 2004 showed that a majority of
UK citizens were against the Constitution. Regarding this fact,
Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said that Britain would be "weak
and marginalised" within Europe if it failed to ratify the
EU Constitution.
On 09.02.2005 British members of parliament strongly voted in favour
of the EU Bill, which was aimed to pave the way for a referendum
on the Constitution early 2006. The EU Bill gave parliamentary approval
to the Constitution, but made clear that the UK could ratify the
treaty only if it won the support of the public in a referendum.
Britain's
voters were to be offered a straightforward question in the referendum
on the Constitution, the question was expected to be: “Should
the United Kingdom approve the Treaty establishing a Constitution
for the European Union?”
Asked the same question in a poll, carried out by the eurosceptic
Daily Telegraph newspaper, on 29.01.2005, only 24 per cent said
Yes and 45 per cent said No, while 25 per cent of those asked said
they had not made up their minds yet. A poll by the Sun newspaper,
which is even more hostile to the EU, produced almost exactly the
same result. The Sunday Telegraph published a poll on 30.01.2005,
saying that 39 per cent supported the Constitution, while 41 per
cent were against. A different poll for the Times at the beginning
of February, showed 36 per cent of people saying "yes"
to the question "Should the UK approve the treaty establishing
a Constitution for the European Union?" and only 29 per cent
replied "no".
During the French campaign a joke among European diplomats in London
was that French critics of the Constitution should be forced to
campaign for a yes vote in Britain on the grounds that it is "too
British" and not federalist enough. At the same time, British
Eurosceptics should be shipped to France to campaign for a no vote
in its referendum because the Constitution goes too far in the French
integrationist direction. That way, the sceptics would neutralise
each other. According to a report by the Centre
of European Reform published in February 2005 there would be
ten options if Britain said no to the EU Constitution - including
a second referendum, a re-negotiation of the Constitution, and a
Franco-German union. Latter would place Britain outside the leading
group of EU countries, which would be bad for Britain, bad for Europe
and bad for the US.
While Foreign Minister Jack Straw admitted on 17.04.2005 that he
did not know whether the referendum would be held in 2006 as planned,
if a negative outcome resulted in France. Prime Minister Tony Blair
reaffirmed on 18.04.2005 that Britain would hold a referendum on
the EU Constitution even if it was rejected by French voters. Nevertheless
at the end of May he suggested that there would not be a referendum
in Britain if French voters turned it down. "If there is still
a Constitution there has got to be a referendum on it," he
said,"If what was to happen was France was to say 'no' and
then the rest of Europe were to tear up the constitution and say
we're forgetting about it - you wouldn't have a referendum on nothing."
On 06.06.2005 Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said that his government
had dropped plans for now to hold a British referendum on the EU
Constitution. Straw declined to rule out a referendum in the future.
"We reserve completely the right to bring back the bill providing
for a UK referendum should circumstances change. But we see no point
in proceeding at this moment," Straw said.
Eurobarometer
(2006), The Future of Europe - Results for the United
Kingdom, Special Eurobarometer 251, Fieldwork: 23/02 –
15/03 2006. (PDF)
Eurobarometer
report, (February 2004): 51%
rather agree, 30% rather disagree*
*Are
you rather agree or rather disagree with the statement: The European
Union must adopt a Constitution.
Eurobarometer
report, (January 2005): 20% favourable, 30% opposed*
*Based
on what you know, would you say that you are in favour of or opposed
to the draft European Constitution?
Eurobarometer
report, (July 2005): 43% favourable, 36% opposed*
*Based
on the question, are you for or against a constitution for the European
Union?
Latest
News
07.06.2005
Britain says it could salvage parts of moribund constitution. EUbusiness.com
06.06.2005
Straw confirms plans to suspend referendum on EU constitution. EUbusiness.com
06.06.2005
Fresh blow to EU treaty as Britain shelves referendum plan. EUbusiness.com
05.06.2005
Britain remains reflective on EU constitution after Chirac-Schroeder
talks. EUbusiness.com
Former
News...
|
| |
DECLARATIONS
BY THE HEADS OF STATE AND GOVERNMENT
Foreign Secretary,
Jack Straw, EU
Constitutional Treaty, Statement, House of Commons, 06.06.2005.
Foreign Secretary,
Jack Straw, EU
Constitutional Treaty - A Strong Britain in a Reforming Europe,
Speech regarding the Second Reading of the European Union Bill,
09.02.2005.
Foreign Secretary,
Jack Straw, The
Patriotic Case for the EU Constitution, written Statement Regarding
the EU Bill, 26.01.05.
Let
the People have the final Say on new European Treaty,
Statement by Tony Blair the House of Commons, London, 20.04.04 (PDF)
|
| |
PROCEDURE
undecided
On 06.06.2005
plans to organise a referendum were suspended and the ratification
of the Constitution "postponed".
|
| |
STATE
OF THE PROCEDURE |
| |
DATE
OF REFERENDUM
undecided |
| |
RELEVANT
DOCUMENTS AND MATERIAL
House of Commons
(2005), The
Future of the European Constitution, Research Paper 05/45, 13.06.2005.
(PDF)
PM Blair, Tony:
Speech to the EU Parliament, 23.06.2005. (HTML)
PM Tony Blair,
statement on the European Council meeting, House of Commons, 20.06.05.
(HTML)
Link:
House of Commons, legislative process regarding the European Union
Bill introduced in the House of Commons on 24th May 2005. (HTML)
Grant, C. (2005),
What
If the British Vote No?, Published in Foreign Affairs, May/June
2005.
Grant, C. (2005),
A
British No would destroy more than the treaty, Centre for European
Reform, published in the Financial Times,16.03.2005, (HTML).
Link: House
of Commons Debates on European Union Bill, 09.02.2005, (please
look for Column: 1527)
House of Commons,
Research Paper, The European Union Bill, 03.02.2005, PDF
Secretary of
State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, "Commentary"
to guide the reader through the Constitutional Treaty, 27.01.2005.
- Commentary - Introduction (PDF)
Commentary - Part 1 (PDF)
Commentary - Part 2 (Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Union)
(PDF)
Commentary - Part 3 (Policies and Functioning of the Union) (PDF)
Commentary - Part 4 (Protocols and Declarations) (PDF)
Commentary - Parts 1-4 (PDF)
Commentary - Annexes (1+2) (PDF)
Secretary of
State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Illustration
of the 1972 European Communities Act with changes proposed in the
EU Bill, PDF
Link:
Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Tackling
myths about the European Constitutional Treaty
Secretary of
State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, European
Union Bill
Hughes, K.,
The
British debate on the EU Constitution: Can the Referendum be Won?,
Forthcoming in Nowa Europa (European Center Natolin in Warsaw),
January 2005.
Kral, D., Pitfalls
of the Constitutional Treaty Ratification in the Czech Republic,
Institute for European Policy, Prague, January 2005.
House of Commons,
Research Paper, The
Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe: Part II (The Charter
of Fundamental Rights), (25.11.2004)
House of Commons,
Research Paper, The
Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe: Part IV and Protocols,
(21.10.2004)
House of Commons,
Research Paper, The
Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe: Part III, (08.10.2004)
House of Commons,
Research Paper,The
Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe: Part I, (06.09.2004)
Donnelly, B
(2004), The
British Government and the European Constitution - history repeats
itself, Federal Trust Policy Commentary.
Parliament's
note regarding ratification issues and possible routes to UK ratification
of the European Constitution (10.05.2004)
White
Paper on the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe by
the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, ©
Crown Copyright 2004 |
|
