The Dilemma of National Referendums in the UK

5.58.00am GMT Sun 28th Oct 2007

Earnshaw Palmer, Liberal Democat East of England European Selection Candidate is calling for legislation to make it possible to hold binding national referendums in the UK.

Earnshaw says "In the UK, we have been inundated with demands for referendums on key aspects of the changing and evolving nature of our relationship in the European Union. In 1975, UK residents were asked to decide on the future of our relationship in the then European Economic Community and the vote was in favour of continued membership. This was unprecedented in the UK. Although subsequent referendums have been held in different parts of the UK on the devolution of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland as well as the proposals for directly elected mayors; a national referendum is yet to be repeated."

"By virtue of the fact that parliamentary sovereignty obtains in UK, it is inconceivable to see how binding referendums can be held without a change in the law and this is the issue that politicians have to address urgently before making any further promises on holding referendums."

"There is no point in holding a referendum if the result is not binding on the government. The government can absolve itself by claiming that it is under no statutory obligation to hold a referendum on say the Reform Treaty."

"The electorate is crying out for an opportunity to register its views on a range of issues the foremost of which is our changing relationship with Europe. How do we as politicians entertain this request and discharge the duties of listening to and reflecting the views of the electorate? Why can't we have a referendum if the electorate demands one?"

"This is the dilemma. Governments will only put forward proposals they are confident of winning. The impact of losing a proposal at a national level can be construed as lack confidence in the government and could undermine its credibility. It is not that the government does not trust the people to have a say on the question of Europe but more likely that a negative outcome might be unpalatable.

• Should we have a referendum on the Reform Treaty or our continued membership of European Union? Either way, as long as there is clarity about what we want to achieve and are willing to accept the results irrespective of the consequences for the United Kingdom.

• Would a Yes or No vote on either proposal lead to the European Union working better for UK citizens?

• What is more important to us, the process or the outcome?

Let us look at the sun and not its shadow.

Liberal Democrats advocate for people to take part in decisions that affect them. This principle can be facilitated by creating a national forum for meaningful debate as well as a means by which people can be consulted on issues that affect them."

My personal view is that you cannot promise people to have a say on an issue and not make it binding. Therefore the moral imperative is to make the holding of a national referendum a statutory obligation and that way the government cannot wriggle out of its commitments, otherwise national referendums will continue to be a dilemma in the UK.