Cameron to publish EU vote bill in bid to defuse party revolt

WASHINGTON Tue May 14, 2013 12:40am BST

Britain's Prime Minister David Cameron responds to a question during a joint news conference with U.S. President Barack Obama in the East Room at the White House in Washington, May 13, 2013. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

Britain's Prime Minister David Cameron responds to a question during a joint news conference with U.S. President Barack Obama in the East Room at the White House in Washington, May 13, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Jonathan Ernst

Related Topics

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Conservatives will unveil a draft bill on Tuesday that could make Prime Minister David Cameron's promise of a referendum on Britain's European Union membership legally binding.

In a political gamble aimed at shoring up Cameron's leadership, the bill would pave the way for an in-out vote by the end of 2017 that will decide Britain's geopolitical and economic destiny for decades ahead.

However, the Conservatives are part of a two-party coalition and do not have a parliamentary majority, so the bill's chances of success aren't guaranteed. Rebels from other parties would need to support it too for it to become law.

Cameron's highly unusual decision to sanction the draft bill was announced in the United States on Monday evening and comes less than four months after he pledged to renegotiate the terms of Britain's EU membership and then hold an in-out vote before the end of 2017.

Many Conservatives say they want to be part of the EU's single market but want to ditch many other aspects of a relationship they fear is becoming increasingly anti-democratic and bureaucratic.

Cameron's referendum promise in January failed to satisfy Conservative critics who have been pressing him to bring forward the vote to before the next national election in 2015 or to pass a law committing the party to holding a vote by the end of 2017.

He decided to partially accede to their demands to try to end a public debate that has made his party look divided, threatening his own re-election chances.

"The Conservative Party will publish a draft bill to legislate for an in-out referendum by the end of 2017," a senior Conservative source told reporters in Washington after Cameron met U.S. President Barack Obama On Monday.

"We will examine all opportunities to bring the bill before parliament, including a private member's bill," the source said.

Conservatives believe the demarche should draw a line under weeks of internal bickering that has damaged the party's image while piling pressure on the opposition Labour party to explain why it doesn't favour such a referendum.

It will be hard for the Conservatives to push any referendum bill through parliament because it will almost certainly be opposed by their pro-EU coalition partners, the Lib Dems, as well as by Labour.

Despite the move up to 100 Eurosceptic Conservative members of parliament are still expected to back an amendment this week criticising legislative plans unveiled by the government because they did not include such a bill.

Conservative lawmaker John Baron, one of the two figures behind the amendment, said Cameron's promise of a draft bill would not persuade him to back down.

"I am sticking by what I am saying. They know that this option could very well fail," he told Reuters. "A far better approach would be to have the courage to support our amendment on Wednesday."

Cameron came to power in a coalition government three years ago after telling his party in 2006 to "stop banging on about Europe", an issue that has divided the Conservatives for decades and helped bring down two of his predecessors, Margaret Thatcher and John Major.

But Conservatives in parliament have been rattled by the growing popularity of the UK Independence Party (UKIP), which campaigns for Britain's withdrawal from the EU and tighter immigration laws. A Guardian/ICM poll showed on Tuesday that UKIP's support had surged to a record high of 18 percent.

UKIP's poll rating has climbed steadily since Cameron's EU referendum pledge in January, with the party taking a quarter of the vote in local elections earlier this month.

Labour, which has a 10-point lead over the Conservatives, said Cameron had "lost control of the agenda and lost control of his party" at a time when he should be working on reviving Britain's economy.

"This seems to be just the latest panicked response from the prime minister who is now following, rather than leading his backbenchers," Labour foreign affairs spokesman Douglas Alexander said in a statement.

(Writing by Andrew Osborn and Peter Griffiths, Editing by Guy Faulconbridge)

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (6)
Raymond.Vermont wrote:
Perhaps a rephrase is required?

A draft bill, as to whether GBR citizens should have the rights to self-determinational rights lying in their own hands, or those of a foreigners they have not elected and whom are unaccountable to them.

May 13, 2013 10:17pm BST  --  Report as abuse
EssexInvestor wrote:
See how low the trust in the political class has fallen. Even his long-distance promise of a referendum in 2017 was not to be trusted so his party is trying to shore up public support in the polls. As Cameron’s ability to deliver on any such promise would be conditional upon his re-election as PM in 2015, the promise was always worth even less than his infamous “cast iron guarantee” about a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

The comments by Obama were interesting too, especially his reference to the British people having their say; has he not done his homework, did he not know that the people were not meant to have a say. Brits have never had a say on the EU and whenever other member states’ voters have their say they almost always say “NO” first time. Then they are forced to change their minds or else the vote is ignored.

The estimates of additional economic activity which might arise from a free trade deal between USA and the EU was instructive. Readers may know there are now about 50 such deals involving Mexico, Canada and many other nations with the EU. In Britain we ask why we cannot have those benefits in just the same ways without being a member of the EU.

I don’t think the US Congress is about to agree to laws being applied there which are made by the institutions of the EU, as we have to suffer. Nor will the US pay billions of dollars a year to the EU as we are forced to do.

Any impact of the deal between the EU and the USA would only affect the trade between them whereas in Britain we are obliged to apply all their regulations to all of our trade, internally and with third countries, and at great cost to ourselves. Overall this has been estimated as ten per cent of UK GDP.

Clearly the answer is for Britain to leave the EU and negotiate a free trade deal with the EU. Our status as such a large customer of the EU with deficits on trade every year but two since we joined, would enable us to cut an even better deal that the US – better for us and virtually cost-free like WTO and other such arrangements.

May 14, 2013 8:15am BST  --  Report as abuse
EssexInvestor wrote:
See how low the trust in the political class has fallen. Even his long-distance promise of a referendum in 2017 was not to be trusted so his party is trying to shore up public support in the polls. As Cameron’s ability to deliver on any such promise would be conditional upon his re-election as PM in 2015, the promise was always worth even less than his infamous “cast iron guarantee” about a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

The comments by Obama were interesting too, especially his reference to the British people having their say; has he not done his homework, did he not know that the people were not meant to have a say. Brits have never had a say on the EU and whenever other member states’ voters have their say they almost always say “NO” first time. Then they are forced to change their minds or else the vote is ignored.

The estimates of additional economic activity which might arise from a free trade deal between USA and the EU was instructive. Readers may know there are now about 50 such deals involving Mexico, Canada and many other nations with the EU. In Britain we ask why we cannot have those benefits in just the same ways without being a member of the EU.

I don’t think the US Congress is about to agree to laws being applied there which are made by the institutions of the EU, as we have to suffer. Nor will the US pay billions of dollars a year to the EU as we are forced to do.

Any impact of the deal between the EU and the USA would only affect the trade between them whereas in Britain we are obliged to apply all their regulations to all of our trade, internally and with third countries, and at great cost to ourselves. Overall this has been estimated as ten per cent of UK GDP.

Clearly the answer is for Britain to leave the EU and negotiate a free trade deal with the EU. Our status as such a large customer of the EU with deficits on trade every year but two since we joined, would enable us to cut an even better deal that the US – better for us and virtually cost-free like WTO and other such arrangements.

May 14, 2013 8:15am BST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.