EU Reform Treaty 'good for Britain'

Europe Minister Jim Murphy explains his take on the Lisbon summit while Lib Dem By Jim Murphy Published 18 October 2007

Gordon Brown and David Miliband are taking part in a European Council meeting in Lisbon, where the Portuguese Presidency will lead a discussion on the EU Reform Treaty among heads of state, heads of Government and Foreign Ministers from all 27 EU member states.

The Reform Treaty is good for Britain and good for Europe. The UK already benefits substantially from its membership of the EU, and will continue to do so under a reformed, re-invigorated EU, able to deliver for citizens across Europe.

The EU strengthens the UK's ability to combat climate change and increases our influence in the world, be it in Burma, Iran or Russia. Let's not forget - 57% of total British trade is with the EU. And around three million British jobs are linked (directly and indirectly) to our trade in goods and services with other EU countries.

Each EU country has its own perspective on how things should be done, but every government in the EU agrees on one thing - that we do need the Reform Treaty.

The Reform Treaty will make the EU more efficient, reducing the EU Commission by a third, simplifying voting systems and introducing a single permanent President of the European Council, rather than the current musical chairs of the rotating system, where member states take six-monthly turns.

It will give the national parliaments of the member states a greater say in EU decision-making, with every national parliament receiving proposals for new EU legislation directly, and giving them the power to send proposals back if a third of member states’ parliaments object.

And there will also be more majority voting in the Council of Ministers, in areas where the UK wants to see quicker decision-making – like humanitarian aid.

These are changes we want. However, we’re also firm on what we don’t want the Reform Treaty to do. There will be no transfer of power away from the UK on issues of fundamental importance to our sovereignty.

By securing our ‘red lines’, we have ensured that there is no threat to our existing labour and social legislation nor our social security system. There is no threat to our common law system or our police and judicial processes. And there is no threat to our independent foreign and defence policy.

The PM has been clear all along: our red lines must be fully respected in the final treaty text. We have been tough in our negotiating stance, and there is no suggestion that anyone will try to unpick the good deal we have achieved. So going into the meeting today and tomorrow we are cautious but confident that they will be respected.

Once the text of the Reform Treaty has been agreed, it will be formally signed by EU Heads of State and Government at the next European Council meeting in December. It will then be for each member state to ratify the Reform Treaty as it sees fit. In the UK, Parliament will have the opportunity to debate the Reform Treaty, and as with all Treaties, Parliament must be satisfied that it is in the national interest, before it can be implemented in national law. Without Parliamentary approval the Treaty cannot go ahead.

When that time comes, I will be making the case to parliamentary colleagues that not only is the Reform Treaty good for Britain and good for Europe, but that it enable us to put the institutional debate behind us. It removes the great distraction that has been consuming the EU for too long. With these institutional questions out of the way, the EU can now channel all of its efforts into the things that really matter.

That means delivering for British and other EU citizens, and making their lives better. There are 92 million people out of work in Europe – that is an issue we must address, together, with urgency. The EU has led the way in the response to climate change – but it can do more. On security, too, the EU can up its game – on both the fight against cross-border crime and terrorism and energy security. The UK is determined that the Reform Treaty marks an end to the period of looking inward and heralds a redoubling of the effort to make the EU deliver for its citizens through effective action in the world.

 
 

5 comments

Derek Bennett's picture

Thu, 2007-10-18 17:35 — Derek Bennett

In the words of a certain tennis player: “You cannot be serious!” If the continued loss of our British democracy by handing over more areas of competence to the unellected bureaucrats in the EU. The loss of our sovereignty by undermining our own Parliament which has to accept that all EU laws are supreme. And by the slow, but sure, draining of influence in the EU due to Britain’s representation being slowly removed, (i.e. the reduction of the numbers of our MEPs and the halving of our Commissioners from two to one) is beneficial to us, then if I go and jump under a bus it will be beneficial to me as the bus will stop quicker.

Maybe that‘s the logic of our EU membership, the sooner we are under the full control of the EU, the sooner we will stop arguing about it!

The Director's picture

Thu, 2007-10-18 20:18 — The Director

I shall be ascertaining legal advice from a European lawyer and taking this treaty to the European Courts. I shall explain that the articles within it are not being signed to in the full context on an architectural point of view.
On a legal consideration what New Labour have done is to create a vacuum within the Human Rights protocols.
Workers from England ,Scotland and Wales will not have the same level of protection as their European counterparts. On a legislative and Human Rights point of view we shall not have the same level of civil liberties as our European counterparts , because of the so called red lines.
Thus under European law , this would be a contravention of the protocols on Human Rights and the protocols banning discrimination.
You see when you look at the factual emphasis , the drafting of such red lines is not only discriminatory but also illegal. To this effect I shall petition the European courts so that these options and red lines can be legally removed.
Furthermore on a multi lateral perspective the opt out on foreign policy is absolutely nonsense. I would want a Government that consults with European counterparts on foreign policy obligations rather than to be tied in to a unilateral position. Thus to my view unless the treaty is endorsed in its entirety , then the only other option is to have a legal hearing at the European Courts.
I shall thus compile a dossier outlining the technical points of the red lines and opt out clauses and how this is a detriment to the people of England ,Scotland and Wales. You cannot have a Government that claims to sign a treaty ,yet chooses to not let its citizens have the same level of benefits as other European citizens.
I shall equally inform the European Parliament of this position as well as the Scottish Government.

Black Tom Strafford's picture

Fri, 2007-10-19 17:14 — Black Tom Strafford

What astonishes me is how Ministers of the Crown in the current government, like Mr Murphy, are so keen to sign away as much as possible of British people's independence to our Masters in Brussels - despite their own pledge of loyalty on entering office to protect Britain's interests! Now if the new EU constitutional treaty is so marvellous, then why can't we, the British people have a referendum on it. Especially when all 3 major parties promised one in the 2005 general election! Just as the Chairman of the Commons European Scrutiny Committee said recently, its all very reminiscent of Neville Chamberlain's appeasement at Munich! Can I undersdtand all the verbiage in the treaty? You bet I can! And even if some people can't, in a democracy their votes are as good as those of appeasing ministers! So, go on! Let's have REFERENDUM on this constitutional treaty NOW!

brianthelion's picture

Fri, 2007-10-19 19:19 — brianthelion

Has Jim Murphy actually studied EC law? The European Court ruled in Case 22/70 that where Europe had a domestic (internal) policy, it had to have a supporting foreign (external) policy. [Source: Federal Trust]

As New Labour has put most areas of policy-making under QMV, without a veto, there are few that will not be covered by the new Constitutional/Reform Treaty.

The European Court has already ruled over areas like corporate taxation, criminal penalties, and confirmed the right of criminals to circulate freely within the EU.
It isn't 'Murphy's law' that counts - it's Europe's.

Gordon Brown may have gone overboard in July urging the public to have their say on all major decisions, but when the truth be known about the democratic deficit, I can see why the government wishes to avoid further debate in the form of a referendum.

OB1's picture

Sat, 2007-10-20 15:36 — OB1

"By securing our ‘red lines’, we have ensured that there is no threat to our existing labour and social legislation nor our social security system."
Threat? It is the UK that typically seeks to hold back progress towards greater recognition of social and labour rights at EU level.
The government's pathetic pandering to EU-phobic opinion (and crazies such as those commenting above) is entirely unedifying, unworthy of Labour voters most of whom seek enhanced protection in employment, in line with European counterparts - not less, on the US model favoured by Tories - and merely serves to highlight the vacuum in Labour thinking where a principled European policy should be.

Latest tweets