UK peers debate EU referendum bill – but will it go through?

The House of Lords met at 10am on Friday to begin the first debate on the European Union referendum bill.

Peers’ working day was likely to be extended beyond its normal 3pm finish as Conservative peers bid to get the legislation over its first hurdle in one day.

The Lords’ scrutiny on the bill must be finished before the final Commons Friday sitting on 28 February or it is likely to fail to become law.

After today’s debate, it must go through committee, report and third reading stages before being returned to MPs.

If the House of Lords makes any changes to the bill, these will have to be agreed or deleted by the Commons, before sending it back to peers – known as Parliamentary ping-pong.

Lords Dobbs

Lords Dobbs, who is spearheading the referendum bill’s passage through the Lords, launched the second reading debate by pleading with his colleagues to listen to the public’s demands for a poll.

He told peers: “This bill is needed and it is very much wanted.

“There is nothing in this bill is so unfair or so unbalanced that it is sufficient reason for denying the people their referendum.”

Referencing the remarks of Lord Mandelson earlier today that a referendum would be a “lottery”, Lord Dobbs added: “It is not – a referendum is about democracy. It is not about being in Europe, it about allowing people to decide their own future.

“It would be a brave man who denies them that choice – and an even braver unelected peer.”

And he concluded: “What we want individually from Europe, what we feel individually about Europe, is not relevant here. The question is what the country wants and I think the answer is very clear.

“They want, they demand, this bill.”

Lord Oakeshott

However, some peers argued against the bill, saying a referendum was the “coward’s way out” of political problems and an “abdication of responsibility.”

Lord Oakeshott pledged to introduce amendments to the bill as he condemned the Tory-backed legislation on its first day in the Lords.

The Liberal Democrat said: “This is an utterly unnecessary, indeed otiose, bill. It does serious damage to business and jobs in Britain and stability and security in Europe.

“It is playing with fire for long-term confidence and investment from all over the world.”

He added: “There is no need anyway for a referendum on Europe when there is a clear choice at the next general election: if you want to come out of Europe, you vote for Ukip. If you want to stay in, you vote Liberal Democrat or Labour. And if you don’t know or you don’t care, you vote Conservative.”

Lord Owen

Lord Owen, who served as foreign secretary to James Callaghan, said the referendum should take place because the public no longer trusts prime ministers and governments over the issue.

Mr Owen, said the bill proposed the wrong date for the poll, insisting it should happen early next year ahead of the general election.

But speaking in the second reading debate on the bill in the Lords, he said such a referendum was inevitable.

“I think this is a gimmick in many respects,” he said. “However why are we here? We are here because successive prime ministers have given commitments to hold a referendum and then haven’t done so.

“The country does not trust us. On this issue of Europe they have seen party after party manoeuvre, manipulate and they don’t believe it, and they don’t actually believe even if they say at a general election in a manifesto there will be a referendum, whether there will be one.

“Under these circumstances it seems to me not unreasonable, because it is the settled will of the British people in my judgment, that there is going to be a referendum.”

Lord Kinnock

Former Labour leader Neil Kinnock said he had been left optimistic by Mr Cameron’s desire after being elected to lead his party for it to “stop banging on about Europe”.

But he said: “Instead, Mr Cameron’s appeal to stop the banging on has been greeted daily by the unyielding europhobes inside, and Ukip outside, his party.

“To the detriment of our country he has pranced to their rhythm.

“As a result, the basic question about this bill is why should the United Kingdom suffer the potentially huge risks and costs of an in-out referendum on issues yet to identified or negotiated, involved conditions and consequences yet to be revealed, under a government yet to be elected, simply because the Prime Minister lacks the fortitude to lead his own party with authority?”

Lord Kinnock said the bill existed only because Mr Cameron had failed despite “lame gestures and rejected assurances” to assuage eurosceptic members of his party.

“He has sought to mollify them, he gets mockery in return, he gets intensified demands in return and he gets a host of private member’s bills in return,” he said.

“His efforts have been as fruitless as appeasement always deserves to be.”

Lord Mandelson

Lord Mandelson, who is co-president of British Influence – a campaign group for the UK to remain in the EU – said the prime minister Foreign Secretary William Hague and David Cameron had been “taken hostage by the militant tendency” within the Tories.

He said: “We need to concentrate on using all of our influence and energy in building up Britain’s influence in Europe, not driving Britain out of Europe.

“This bill is not about changing or improving the EU, it is indeed stage one in raising impossible demands on the European Union in order to create the pretext for leaving it.

“It will create huge uncertainty amongst investors at a time when we need confidence to build our economic recovery. It will put the government into a straightjacket, binding it to a rigid timetable regardless of what is happening in the rest of Europe, and indeed what is happening in our own country.

“It certainly won’t increase the government’s negotiating authority in Europe at a time when we need to be reaching out and creating coalitions so as to safeguard our national interests as a member of the European Union and the single market, but not in the core eurozone.

“My message to the government is stop grandstanding to the Ukip gathering. If you are really serious about European reform, you have to go out and work for it and join with others in achieving it.

“If the need or cause for a referendum arises in the future – if a new treaty involving fresh European integration or transfer of powers requires it – that will be the time to consider the proposition of holding a referendum.”