Comments on: What is a constitution?

By: Time to go on the offensive on Europe? « Anders Hanson

Time to go on the offensive on Europe? « Anders Hanson — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 20:22:06 +0000

[...] it isn’t a view that I hold. Whatever the technical differences, as explained very clearly by James Graham, the public is under the distinct impression that one was guaranteed and we cannot now renege on [...]

By: Top of the Blogs: The Golden Dozen #49 | Liberal Democrat Voice

Top of the Blogs: The Golden Dozen #49 | Liberal Democrat Voice — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 11:55:40 +0000

[...] What is a constitution on James Grahamâ€™s Quaequam Blog! Blog Sticking up for party policy, sort of, on an EU [...]

By: James Graham

James Graham — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 10:50:00 +0000

Mike, fundamentally I agree. I’m very conscious of the fact that regardless of the rights and wrongs of the matter, arguing about which kind of referendum is exactly the kind of Policy Wonkiness that Nick Clegg said he wanted to move the party away from.

I’m only arguing the very narrow point that however tenuous our position on this is, it is far more principled than the Tory line.

By: Mike Hanlon

Mike Hanlon — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 19:14:40 +0000

This is all *too* technical for how the public sees it, and that’s what matters.

The problem with apparently switching to a different referendum pledge is that, having appeared to abandon our original pledge, people are not likely to believe this new policy will ever be delivered.

I’ve had people say to me that as soon as there’s any chance of that ‘in / out’ referendum happening, we’ll back out on that too. It’s not good.

To me, if we’re honest, what the document is labelled, and the manner in which it achieves its ends, is basically irrelevant if the net effect of both seems to be the same.

And everyone who’s not a fool or a minister appears to agree that this is the case with the Lisbon Treaty and original EU Constitution.

This all boils down to trust.

In any case, why does supporting an in / out referendum necessarily preclude supporting one on the Lisbon Treaty, as we have on previous ‘amending’ treaties?

By: Tinter

Tinter — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:06:48 +0000

I think there is an element of backtracking, but I think a large part of this is due to poor choices regarding our earlier commitments. We should have made clear that we supported a referendum on the constitution as an in or out process.

By: Paul Walter

Paul Walter — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 15:50:42 +0000

James, I am delighted to have your seal of approval on the main argument:

“But is Nick Clegg correct to insist that an in or out referendum is the closest we have to the promised referendum on the Constitutional Treaty? Abso-bloody-lutely.

Because the whole point of the Constitutional Treaty was that it was a â€œdelete all, replace withâ€ process. It was a Year Zero approach to reforming the EU. Lisbon, at the insistence of the Euro-sceptics, is not; it is an amending treaty. That being the case, the EUâ€™s constitution is the body of treaties going all the way back to Rome. If you want a referendum on the EUâ€™s constitution, you have to have a referendum about that.”