Referendum on EU Treaty

Speech by David Ford delivered to Assembly on Mon 8th Oct 2007

I shall do my best to annoy Sammy Wilson as much as possible by congratulating Mr Easton on proposing the motion. I welcome the opportunity for the House to debate the motion, which I shall support. I do so almost entirely not for the reasons that were put forward by the three Members who have spoken in favour of it, and with considerable agreement with the points that Alban Maginness made against the motion. Such is the kind of politics that takes place in the Chamber.

Fundamentally, I disagree with the narrow-minded interpretation that has been put forward by Mr Easton in his proposing of the motion. Yet, Mr Easton hit on a key issue if Europe is to make progress. That was highlighted when Danny Kennedy referred to the difference between the need for a referendum and the desirability of a referendum. Those who are involved in European Government at different levels have, largely, envisaged their futures in enhancing co-operation; however, it is clear that there are problems in bringing the citizens of Europe with them. That is why I disagree with Mr Maginness's point in opposing a referendum.

At least we have been spared the "bent banana" debate, but we have been concerned about national self-interest in a nineteenth-century version of sovereignty. Frankly, that is no longer the world in which we live. Eleven or 12 years ago, on a visit to Copenhagen, I met a Danish politician and sat with him on the banks of the Skagerrak looking across the narrow stretch of water to Sweden. As a boy, he had watched the Soviet Baltic fleet steaming past in a way that directly threatened to the people of Denmark.

In December 2004, I had the pleasure of returning to Copenhagen when the Europe of 15 became the Europe of 25. Three former states of the Soviet Union were among the ten extra nations that joined. That is how much the European project has moved on. We should concentrate on what Europe has done to build a culture of peace and prosperity for its citizens. That is why the European Union is not made up of 6, 9, 10, 12, 15, or even 25 member states; rather it is composed of 27 member states. Other countries wish to join, as huge progress has been made, and working together in Europe has benefited everyone.

However, it is clear that many people have been left behind and have not reaped the benefits. That is why I urge Alban Maginness to take heart and to have confidence that, in a referendum, the case can be argued for the benefits of belonging to the European Union. Many of the points that he highlighted about the new arrangements in the reform treaty are valid. By and large, they are tidying-up exercises, yet there is a need to show that people can be brought along with them.

The hypocrisy of the Conservative Party that refused a referendum on the Maastricht Treaty, which is of great significance, has now been turned on its head into demanding a referendum, but that does not mean that those of us who want the people of Europe to be engaged with Europe and engaged with a cross-European future, should not also support such a call.

I remember the 1975 referendum to which Alex Easton briefly referred, in that it was actually a fundamental debate about whether the United Kingdom should be in or out of Europe. Indeed, that is the argument that Mr Easton advances today. It is not about the treaty - it is about whether we should participate at all. I welcome the opportunity to have a debate about the role of the United Kingdom in general, and Northern Ireland in particular, and the benefits that we will have from the future of Europe. That referendum was called as an opportunity for the Harold Wilson Government to escape difficult decisions, by palming them off on a referendum. It resulted in a convincing and clear decision among the people of the United Kingdom that they wish to remain in Europe. Against expectations, a resounding majority in Northern Ireland also wished to remain in Europe and to play their part in it.

Therefore, let us have the referendum. Let us have an honest, clear and open debate about all the implications, and let us not pretend that it is simply about the fine detail of the treaty, because there is a strong argument to be made for the United Kingdom being active in Europe. The case, frankly, is whether we will be influential in Europe, or irrelevant in Europe. I want that case to be discussed, and I want the United Kingdom to continue to play its part in that Europe as we move forward. A referendum on the EU treaty is long overdue: bring it on.