Eurozone Financial Assistance Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: HM Treasury

Eurozone Financial Assistance

Jacob Rees-Mogg Excerpts
Tuesday 24th May 2011

(12 years, 11 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Hoey Portrait Kate Hoey
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Yes. I am a supporter of the People’s Pledge campaign, and any other campaign that I see on a referendum. I would like those campaigns to work together more.

Even in the House today, we are going to end up being unable to have a clear vote on this issue because of the way in which the procedure works and because of the way in which the Government—like previous Governments—are in a nice, cosy little group with all the pro-Europeans to ensure that we never have a real vote on these matters. I am not sure whether all those Members who have signed up to the Government’s amendment knew what they were signing up to. I cannot believe that they do not support the motion tabled by the hon. Member for Rochester and Strood (Mark Reckless). Looking at the amendment, we see that they accept the motion up to and including the point that the EFSM is “legally unsound”. If something is legally unsound, the Government should automatically oppose it. I am sure that the European Union will be quivering when it hears that the Government’s amendment proposes that the Government

“raise the issue of the EFSM at the next meeting of the Council of Ministers or the European Council; and supports any measures which would lead to an agreement for a Eurozone-only arrangement.”

--- Later in debate ---
Chris Heaton-Harris Portrait Chris Heaton-Harris
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I should love to agree with the hon. Lady on that—so I will.

Jacob Rees-Mogg Portrait Jacob Rees-Mogg
- Hansard - -

Is there anything to prevent us from requiring the European Court of Justice to rule on whether this use of the mechanism is legal?

Chris Heaton-Harris Portrait Chris Heaton-Harris
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I honestly do not think so.

In the most basic terms, voting for the original motion will not mean that we are no longer liable to contribute to bail-outs via the EFSM. Worse than that—as I have said—because the Government signalled they were not likely to accept the original motion, it would in all likelihood have fallen, and therefore, far from this House having put its foot down, it would not have had a view at all. My amendment merely recognises that reality. It does not build up false hope that we can simply stop being involved in these matters, but it does send a message to Government that I hope will be reflected in the ongoing debates on them: that this House wants there to be a eurozone-only arrangement in the future.

Too regularly in this place and elsewhere, those of us who question various aspects of our relationship with the European Union march our supporters to the top of the hill only to find that we are outnumbered and outfoxed, and are then valiantly and gloriously defeated. We need to get real.