Clause 1 - Electoral regions in the United Kingdom
European Parliament (Representation) Bill
5:00 pm
Mr William Cash (Stone, Conservative)
The hon. Gentleman says, ''Far too left wing'', but I agree with certain ingredients of the manner in which the European People's party proceeds. I certainly do not agree with it, however, on federalism or matters relating to the social agenda, on which it agrees with other Members of the European Parliament. The key point is that although one cannot reduce the exercise to questions of numbers, we all have to acknowledge that, as with any parliamentary arrangement, there are splits in the European Parliament.
The key question is where the centre of gravity will be. I do not have a crystal ball; the nearest that I have is the Bill and the treaties. Having studied the European issue for a long time, I know that the tendency will be towards moving further and further down the route to a German Europe. Thomas Mann once said that there would either be a European Germany or a German Europe; I suspect that it will be the latter. We need to take account of that and ask whether it is in Germany's interest.
I acknowledge that the protocol is an international agreement for the purposes of section 2 of the European Communities Act 1972, and that it can be regarded as binding on the United Kingdom. I should like to know why the protocol does not say that it is subject to arrangements on the accession question, which would include referendums in all member states. As I read it, we would expect to see the figures set out in it only when the referendums have taken place. It states that
''The number of representatives elected in each Member State shall be as follows''.
Why does it not say that that will be subject to the referendums taking place? If we have 87 representatives now, with the figure dropping to 72 only when the process has been completed, it is necessary to say that that process will be subject to the referendums having taken place. That is one of the reasons why I am querying the proposals.
Article 2 of the protocol states:
''Subject to paragraph 3, the total number of representatives . . . for the 2004–2009 term shall be equal to the number of representatives''.
I should have expected it to be stipulated that that process is subject to the referendums, and not merely subject to paragraph (3), which is important.
Paragraph (3), the crucial part of the mechanism, states:
''If the total number of members . . . is less than 732''.
The Government initially said that come hell or high water there would not be more than 700 members. Magically, in the course of what was no doubt a long night of negotiations, the figure was changed. I remember the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome rightly picking me up by saying that he was surprised that I had not remembered that the matter was under article 189.
Paragraph (3) states:
''If the total number of members . . . is less than 732, a pro rata correction shall be applied to the number of representatives to be elected in each Member State so that the total number is as close as possible to 732, without such a correction leading to the number of representatives to be elected in each Member State being higher than that provided for in Article 190(2) of the Treaty establishing the European Community and in Article 108(2) of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community for the 1999–2004 term''.
That is a little bit cheeky because the mechanism provided is not subject to referendums and will operate even if the referendums do not produce affirmative votes in each case. The mechanism slides over those issues by using a lot of verbiage. It provides for a system based on the assumption that there may be referendums that produce negative rather than affirmative votes. That is how one would get to a point at which the figure was less than 732.