So, Queen’s Speech or Private Member’s bill? To express regret by voting against the Queen’s Speech because there is no referendum bill, or to enshrine Cameron’s (last) promise to Britain, to renegotiate and then vote into Law. The Tory’s are now trying to outflank UKIP by legislating for their promised 2017 referendum. No doubt they feel they deserve the UKIP votes because after all, they agree with them, it seems the electorate’s less sure.
It’ll be dramatic stuff, and it’s not a month since Cameron recalled Parliament to pay tribute to Thatcher, allowing the Tory Party to demonstrate its tribalism and cohesion at its most powerful.
However I think we should remember what they said in their manifesto. This is their contract with the voters.
We will be positive members of the European Union but we are clear that there should be no
further extension of the EU’s power over the Uk without the British people’s consent. We will
ensure that by law no future government can hand over areas of power to the EU or join the
Euro without a referendum of the British people. We will work to bring back key powers over
legal rights, criminal justice and social and employment legislation to the Uk.
Me thinks they’ve moved towards departure…a lot.
As others have said, Parliamentary Sovereignty means that a Parliament can’t bind its successors, so interesting to see how that works.