Mr Speaker
I am concerned at the portrayal of this debate by some of my colleagues.
This is not a straight 'in or out' debate, and, to portray it as such, is disingenuous.
This debate was triggered because more than 100,000 members of the public signed an e-petition to register their concern….
And, as their democratically elected representatives, it is our duty to listen to them.
Put simply, this is a debate to bring forward a Bill to this House during the next session of parliament, calling for a referendum on the future of our role with the EU.
It was drawn in the broadest possible terms to allow MPs an opportunity to deliberate over what to put forward.
Remember, the people have not had say on Europe since 1975.
That means no adult under the age of 54 has ever been given a choice.
The last time this country voted, the EU was the common market.
After no fewer than five treaties and four name changes, it is a very different beast now.
Today we have the Lisbon treaty and its federal inclinations.
And our citizens have been stripped of power.
They have, effectively, been disenfranchised … which makes the legitimacy of the European project questionable.
Yet the weekend's polls make the electorate’s view pretty clear.
We keep being told that now is not the time to rock the boat because of the financial situation.
I ask, when is it the right time to end a sour and destructive relationship?
We are all aware that the financial crisis within the eurozone is top of everyone’s agenda.
But, I would argue, that by staying on a train which is heading towards the buffers, we are leaving our country more vulnerable to this financial mess than less.
And I’m tired of being told we will repatriate powers when nothing of the sort ever happens.
We have not discounted the idiotic notion of signing up to a tax on financial transactions … we have passed several financial instruments in this Parliament alone, giving the EU closer surveillance of our budget and finances … we are still contributing to bailout funds … and we’ve spent twice as much on the European Financial Stability Mechanism during the first year of this Parliament as we’ve saved on our domestic austerity programme.
I met a Russian professor several years ago when I was working as a journalist.
After the interview, I asked him how his nation is coping with its new-found democracy.
It was a struggle, he replied, but not as much of a struggle as we were experiencing.
I asked him what he meant.
He told me the West had lectured Russia on the dangers of a centralized state for 70 years and now we were following the same path.
How true.
We’ve been assured that the new referendum lock, also passed during this Parliament, will prevent any more automatic transfers of power.
The problem is that someone has to decide just what breaches this lock and what does not.
And so - as before - the torrent of small, insignificant changes becomes a deluge.
There is far too much wriggle room.
We are told that we should await an opportunity to renegotiate.
And we are told that Parliament is too busy firefighting to be distracted by such irrelevancies.
But anyone who has been paying attention over the last 18 months knows only too well how much time we spend on Europe already …
Let me remind you that our own Commons library calculated that half our time in this House is spent on EU initiatives … cause for concern, in my view.
I promised as a candidate......we promised as a party.....that we would get our country back…..
We would repatriate our powers and our freedoms.
It’s time we kept our promise to the people ... they must have their say.
If not now, when?