The Minister seemed to get his ratchets in a bit of a twist in his written ministerial statement yesterday. First he said that all ratchet clauses would be subject to primary legislation, then that major ratchet clauses would be subject to a referendum, and then, towards the end of his written ministerial statement, he confessed that there is no agreed definition of what a ratchet clause is at all, so his legislation is a pile of nonsense really. Does he not accept that the real danger here is that, effectively, what he is doing is asking the courts to decide when there will be a referendum or when there has to be primary legislation, because they will be deciding what is a ratchet clause?I guess that's what happens when you're promising to give a referendum which in reality you don't actually want to do. I can't wait for the first; 'when is a ratchet not a ratchet' court case. Now that would be embarrassing for Cameron.
Wednesday, 15 September 2010
Pile Of Nonsense
So says Labour MP Chris Bryant on the European Union Bill which is proposing the 'referendum lock':