David
Sumberg MEP
Date: 10/10/2007
PROMISES PROMISES
Many readers might be confused about the latest EU treaty and whether or not there should be a referendum. Such confusion is understandable given the very different messages coming from our own government at very different times.
Several years have gone by since Tony Blair put his name to the original proposed EU constitutional treaty. At that stage it was presented as simply a ‘tidying up’ exercise and therefore could not be a problem. But then as people started to read what was actually in the document, there was growing public awareness that there was in fact a major problem. The constitutional implications in terms of transfer of powers were seen to be substantial so finally Tony Blair accepted that a referendum was the right way forward – it couldn’t just be left to MPs to decide. Nothing had changed and yet this same treaty was suddenly no longer a simple tidying up exercise.
However, following agreement at a recent EU summit in Brussels, a third message has emerged. After lengthy negotiations there are now allegedly no constitutional implications after all. The treaty is no longer about a European constitution and so apparently needs no referendum. It is merely ‘an amending treaty’. Or is it?
The reality is that this new treaty gives the EU its own legal personality for the first time. It will have its own diplomatic service and its own foreign minister. And it will have its own full time president. More decisions will now be taken by majority voting with more national vetoes surrendered and with less opportunity for Britain to block new initiatives that are not in our interest.
So the issue is really very simple – it’s a question of keeping two promises. The first is that the government promised that there would be a referendum and the second is that Gordon Brown had promised to restore trust in politics. Holding a referendum on this proposed constitution for Europe would be a good place to start.
WE SHALL REMEMBER HIM
I have occasionally in these articles cast a tiny doubt on whether MEPs can make a difference to the lives of individual citizens. The answer I suppose will vary according to each MEP and I was vividly reminded of what can be achieved when the news was broken recently of the death of one of my former Conservative colleagues, Lord Bethell.
Nick Bethell had been a member of the European Parliament for over 23 years. In this role he built on his formidable record, first established as a member of the House of Lords as a champion on human rights, democracy and peace.
Students of literature may recall the awarding of the Nobel prize to the jailed Russian dissident Alexander Solzhenytsin, author of Cancer Ward. Few people had heard of him in the West; without Nick that might still be the case today. It was Nick Bethell who tracked him down in jail, smuggled out his manuscript, translated and published his work and helped secure worldwide recognition and pressure for his release. Such an achievement made Nick very special but it was just one of many. Through mobilising world opinion, he pressurised the USSR to free other Russian dissidents from their gulags including Andrej Sakharov. In the European Parliament he introduced the annual Sakharov prize, awarded to an individual champion of human rights who was often in jail in a totalitarian state.
He also fought for the rights of us all to break the apparent cartel of the big airlines with the freedom of the skies campaign which brought the benefit of cheap flights to the continent for millions of people.
Lord Bethell was by no means a typical MEP but he showed what can be achieved if you set your sights high enough and have the will to deliver. He remains an example to us all and will not be forgotten.