| Previous Section | Home Page |
Mr. Max Madden (Bradford, West) : As my hon. Friend knows, the main qualification for voting purposes in the United Kingdom is residence on a given date at a given address. Under these arrangements, what will be the qualification for residence for a European union citizen? How long will he have had to live in the United Kingdom before residence can be claimed? What information will be sought ; to whom will it be sent? Will there be any right of appeal if residence is refused? What would happen to a person denied the right of residence, given that there are no deportation rights under these provisions?
Mr. Blair : That is a fairly lengthy list of questions. The issue of residence will be justiciable by a citizen of Europe in exactly the same way as it is now under our domestic law. As for the test of residence, article 8b makes it clear, in respect of this and in respect of voting for the European Parliament, that detailed arrangements are a matter to be discussed by the Council on a proposal from the Commission and from the European Parliament. Those are the circumstances in which some of these questions will be answered.
Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody (Crewe and Nantwich) : I think that my hon. Friend is saying that the House of Commons is not to be given the information because it is not available. Does he intend to deal with article 8.2, which he has not yet mentioned but which speaks not only of enjoying rights, but of the fact that
"citizens shall be subject to the duties imposed thereby". What does he imagine that those duties will be?
Mr. Blair : The duties are set out there are duties laid down in the treaty of Rome. As I understand it, article 8 is not an article of the Maastricht treaty. It is to be a new article of the treaty of Rome, so the obligations set out in it are those of the treaty of Rome. Article 48, for instance, concerns the freedom of people to work in other member states. It imposes rights and obligations. I should have thought that the idea of taking rights and obligations together was entirely sensible--
Several Hon. Members rose --
Mr. Blair : It is an extraordinary feature of these debates that saying something that one thinks is entirely uncontroversial provokes a storm of outrage.
Mr. Richard Shepherd (Aldridge-Brownhills) : Why do all the entitlements to which the hon. Gentleman has referred require citizenship?
Column 30
Mr. Blair : Citizenship is established by the new treaty, but the rights that people have are rights that they already have to a certain extent under the Single European Act-- the right to move around freely within the Community, for example. The purpose of citizenship is to add, in part symbolically, to the rights that people already possess. Citizenship follows entirely naturally from the fact that people are given certain rights and obligations in the Community. The notion of citizenship is sensibly derived from those principles.
Mr. Marlow : I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way with his usual supreme courtesy. I should like to reinforce the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Mr. Shepherd). All these rights and obligations will exist if and when this Bill is passed. They already exist under the European Communities (Amendment) Act 1986, so why do we need the concept of citizenship? I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman's constituents feel this way, but many of mine certainly do not want to be European citizens, which they will be forced to be if the Bill is passed. Why does he want to impose that on people when there is no benefit to be had from it?
Mr. Blair : As I have just said, these obligations and rights exist anyway--
Mr. Blair : I think that my hon. Friend will find that they do if he looks at the treaty carefully. Citizenship merely formalises the relationship. Many people see no contradiction between being citizens of Europe, as defined by the treaty, and being citizens of their own national states.
Mr. Ted Rowlands (Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney) : Under any of the provisions, will it be possible for a person to renounce his citizenship of the union ?
Mr. Winnick : If it is, may I apply now to opt out ?
Mr. Blair : I note that my hon. Friend wishes to add to the opt-out list.
Surely the position is exactly the same as the one that currently exists for a citizen of this country. One does not renounce that here or in Europe.
Mr. Wilkinson : That relates to the question that I wish to pose. How on earth can a citizen of the union renounce his citizenship without renouncing his British birthright or British nationality that he acquired by naturalisation ? Surely there is a great distinction. There is no process for renouncing European citizenship, whereas a British citizen can renounce citizenship whenever he or she wishes. 4 pm
Mr. Blair : If a British citizen renounces his citizenship, it will have an impact on his citizenship under the treaty, but I see no great problem about that. I shall speak about citizenship towards the end of my speech. I accept that there is a fundamental disagreement between those who regard the concept of citizenship in Europe as awful and those who do not. We would do well to recognise that at the beginning.
Sir Teddy Taylor (Southend, East) rose --
Mr. Blair : I should like to make some more progress before allowing any more interventions.
Column 31
Mr. Spearing : Perhaps my hon. Friend would allow me to intervene before he leaves his present point.
Mr. Spearing : The hon. Member for Ross, Cromarty and Skye (Mr. Kennedy), who speaks for the Liberal Democrats on this matter, may like to consider my intervention. My hon. Friend says that the provision does not change much : it just gives a new name to obligations under the treaty of Rome. However, we are not to become citizens of the treaty of Rome or even the city of Rome because article 8 states :
"Citizenship of the Union is hereby established."
[Hon. Members :-- "Hear, hear."] The hon. Member for Ross, Cromarty and Skye may well want to become a citizen of the European union under the treaty of that union which, of course, subsumes the treaty of Rome. Why does my hon. Friend think that at midnight on a certain day every citizen of this country will become obligated to the duties imposed by citizenship of the union, which may well be greater than the duties imposed by citizenship of the United Kingdom?
Mr. Blair : Some of us feel that the advent of citizenship in Europe is not a loss of national identity. That is the point at issue. I do not at all regard it as a loss of national identity because I think that we shall gain something from it, and that that gain will outweigh any theoretical loss.
Mr. Charles Kennedy (Ross, Cromarty and Skye) : The hon. Gentleman has been diligent in allowing interventions by those who do not share his and my outlook on this issue, and it is fair to allow an intervention putting the other side of the case. The point that the hon. Gentleman makes is extremely well established in the United Kingdom. No one among those hon. Members from Wales and Scotland who have been most active and vociferous in the debate suggests that people from Wales or Scotland are any less Welsh or Scottish because they happen to be British subjects. They are subjects rather than citizens, and many of us think that it is worth establishing citizenship in this country and in the wider European Community as well.
Mr. Blair : I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman, but I do not think that we shall be entirely persuasive on this matter.
Article 8d gives the right to petition the European Parliament and to apply to the ombudsman. The procedures for doing that are set out in articles 138d and 138e of the treaty of Rome. The ombudsman is given the important power to investigate maladministration in the European Community. Article 8e imposes an obligation on the Commission to report progress in relation to citizenship and it allows rights to be added or strengthened by the Council unanimously on a Commission proposal after consulting the European Parliament. That change can be effected only in accordance with the constitutional requirements of member states.
Those are the rights that are set out. The article is in part symbolic and in part it confers certain rights to vote, to petition the European Parliament and to go to the ombudsman. The procedure gives certain rights and imposes certain obligations, but it also has a formal status. Many people understand that the European Community has a power over the citizens of the Community, so it is entirely sensible that, where people are both ruled and
Column 32
have a share in ruling, citizenship should be established for them. Indeed, we should be looking for new and better ways to involve the citizens of Europe in the decisions that will affect them. Article 8 is at least a beginning in that process. It does not mean that we scrap our nationality or citizenship, or even that we subordinate it. It means that running alongside our rights and obligations as British citizens will be a European citizenship.Ms. Mildred Gordon (Bow and Poplar) : Does my hon. Friend accept that obligations under the treaty include, for everybody over the age of 18 in this country, conscription for military service?
Mr. Blair : As far as I am aware, it does not include that obligation.
The Single European Act, which was passed some years ago, allows people to move freely around the European Community. Article 8 builds on and extends that. We have had that provision for some time without any of the deleterious effects suggested by some hon. Members.
Mr. Winnick : I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his courtesy ; he has taken many interventions from both sides of the Committee. Does he agree that, however much he wishes to minimise the position, the article formalises in the Bill and in the treaty a new and revolutionary development? What authority or mandate do we have from the British people to introduce a citizenship of the union? I know of no mandate or authority that would allow us to follow that route. This may be a revolutionary idea for both Front Benches, but would not it be far more appropriate to ask the British people whether they agree with the proposal? If, by a majority, they say that they do, I shall accept that that is their will. What authority or mandate do we have to follow what is undoubtedly--although the word is not used for obvious reasons--a federal route? It is a paving step towards total federal union.
Mr. George Robertson (Hamilton) indicated dissent.
Mr. Winnick : It does not matter how much my hon. Friend the Member for Hamilton (Mr. Robertson) shakes his head, it is a federal route. Once we follow it, it will be extremely difficult to reverse the tide. We must have a mandate from the British people before we proceed in that way.
The Chairman : Order. I am sure that the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. Robertson) was shaking his head because he knew that the matter was not covered by the amendment.
Mr. Blair : Our mandate is derived from our ability as Members of Parliament to represent our constituents. Article 8 will allow people the right to vote in both local elections and European elections. It will also allow them to petition the European Parliament and to go to the ombudsman. I cannot for the life of me see why those rights are so inconsistent with our ability to function effectively, either as a country or as individuals within a country, that some hon. Members should construct an edifice of outrage. I think it to be an entirely sensible notion.
Sir Teddy Taylor : Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Column 33
Mr. Blair : I want to conclude to allow someone else to speak, but I will take a final intervention.
Sir Teddy Taylor : The hon. Gentleman has obviously studied the matter carefully. Is he right to say that there is a real bonus in all this? I have a residence in Southend-on-Sea and another in Glasgow, but British law states that I can vote in only one of those places. If someone who is a resident of Paris also becomes a resident of Southend-on-Sea, will he be able to vote twice? That could be a dramatic development. Is there the hidden bonus that someone who has residences in two countries can vote in both, but someone who had two residences in this country can vote only once? That would be a dramatic bonus for the democratic system.
Mr. Blair : Of course one could not vote at two places in the same election, but one can do as the hon. Gentleman says now. Article 8 does not affect those arrangements. I disagree with the hon. Gentleman's statement that we shall lose something by the notion of citizenship in Europe. For a generation that has seen and liked a Europe in which barriers to co- operation are coming down, citizenship provides something of a symbol.
Sir Teddy Taylor : Will the hon. Gentleman answer my question? Will it be two votes or one?
Mr. Blair : I have answered the hon. Gentleman's question many times. Viewed through the eyes of young people in particular in this country today, the prospect of a closer Europe is good. It is not frightening ; it does not alarm them. It can even excite and sometimes inspire them. I do not believe that the concept of citizenship will be in any way detrimental to our country or those who live in it. Viewed sensibly, it will be part of progress towards a better, more stable world-- and the European Community has a place in that.
The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Kenneth Clarke) : I am grateful to the hon. Member for Sedgefield (Mr. Blair) for moving his amendment in the way that he did. Having returned to these debates, I am glad that they make a welcome change in the distribution of labour between the two Front Benches. Normally, it falls to the Minister to explain particular provisions and to answer interventions, but I am spared that in large part, because the hon. Member for Sedgefield has already subjected himself to
cross-examination on every aspect of article 8.
I congratulate the hon. Gentleman, as I did the other day, on giving answers that are entirely in line with my understanding of article 8. It is becoming increasingly clear to me as we debate parts of the Bill in which the hon. Gentleman and I have been involved that--as I have long suspected, for as long as we have been in the House--the hon. Gentleman's views on the European Community are indistinguishable from my own.
Mr. Blair rose--
Mr. Clarke : The hon. Gentleman rises to find a difference. He has an unfortunate mental block on the social chapter, which I know that he wanted to see included in the obligations on us, whereas we declined to be drawn into that. The hon. Gentleman holds different views also on economic and monetary union. Labour's position is that we should have assented, whereas the Government decided to opt out of the immediate
Column 34
provisions of EMU and to reserve questions such as a single currency for a later date. As some of my hon. Friends have said, in current circumstances that date looks further away rather than nearer.Mr. Blair rose--
Mr. Clarke : I will give way to the hon. Gentleman now. For the sake of defending his own back, as I appreciate, he is trying to find some difference between his opinions and my own.
Mr. Blair : The right hon. and learned Gentleman is attempting to answer my question before I ask it. If we wholeheartedly agree on those issues, why is not the right hon. and learned Gentleman prepared, as is every other party in Europe--socialist or conservative--to agree to the social chapter and make sure that social Europe is part of the new Europe that we want to create?
The Chairman : Order. Perhaps that discussion could take place elsewhere, because that aspect is not covered by the amendment.
Mr. Clarke : I defer to your ruling, Mr. Morris, because that topic was debated at considerable length last week.
On citizenship, I agree entirely with the views of the hon. Member for Sedgefield. Like him, I feel no sense of outrage at the idea that, together with being a national of the United Kingdom, I shall be a citizen of the European union. I understand that some people in this country feel qualms about that proposition, but I do not believe that their view is held by the majority.
When the concept of European citizenship is examined in the context of article K, the practical consequences should not raise fears in anyone's mind. In fact, important new rights will flow from it to the citizens of this country.
Mr. Marlow : Does my right hon. and learned Friend intend to respond to the debate if he manages to catch your eye later, Mr. Morris? He is putting the Government's case now, and several speeches will follow. It would be helpful if we knew that, after those speeches, he will respond ; otherwise, it will be difficult for hon. Members to know whether to intervene at this stage.
4.15 pm
Mr. Clarke : I am not usually accused of being too withdrawn in debates, or of being glued to my seat. Perhaps unfortunately, I regard the matter as fairly straightforward, and I am speaking now mainly to reinforce what has been said by the hon. Member for Sedgefield. As I said in our previous debate, whether I speak again rather depends on what points are raised. If points are raised that have not been dealt with so far, I may seek to catch your eye later, Mr. Morris. Let me, however, keep my options open by saying that I see no point in doing so if I find at that stage that I have nothing new to add, or that no new points have been raised.
Mr. Rowlands : Whatever the joys and benefits of citizenship of a European union, will it be possible for someone who does not wish to belong to that union to renounce his or her citizenship?
Mr. Clarke : For as long as a person is a British national, that person will be a European citizen, under the terms of the treaty and the Bill. As was said earlier, if someone wishes to renounce British nationality, certain
Column 35
consequences will follow ; but there is no separate provision whereby a person can remain a United Kingdom national but renounce citizenship of the European union. As I hope to illustrate, trying to renounce citizenship would have few practical consequences for such people ; indeed, they would be giving up important new rights--albeit of a limited kind--conferred by the Maastricht treaty.Mr. Cash : I congratulate my right hon. and learned Friend on being the first Secretary of State to attend the Committee stage. I should like to hope that some of the others will appear to speak about foreign affairs and, indeed, Treasury matters. I commend my right hon. and learned Friend on the way in which he is taking all this punishment.
Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the word "municipal" is important, in relation to the question of citizenship? The European Court of Justice has already ruled that the word "municipal", in relation to the Community, means "national" : that raises serious questions of interpretation, in regard to whether the right of a national to vote in other countries' elections will arise. Will my right hon. and learned Friend ensure that a careful assessment is made by his legal and other advisers?
Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that questions are also raised in relation to the duties imposed under title II, including questions relating to allegiance and possible conscription? Many such matters are dealt with effectively by provisions in the citizenship section of the treaty, which seem to be more like a blank cheque than anything else.
Mr. Clarke : Let me deal with my hon. Friend's points in reverse order. The treaty and the Bill impose no new duties on individuals. It is the existing duty of us all to comply with the law, including such European Community law as is directly applicable in this country, or has been introduced by Parliament following a European directive. Sometimes a United Kingdom court judgment will impose a duty on an individual to comply with what is the law of the land because of our European Community membership, but no new duties are being inclosed. I am glad to say that the idea of a duty to serve in a European army, or to be conscripted into military service of some kind, is entirely unfounded. I understand that that issue featured extensively in the Danish referendum : one reason why many Danes were induced to vote against the treaty was the fact that campaigners had persuaded them that they were about to be conscripted into a European army. According to all my study of the treaty and all the advice that I have received, there is no such risk.
Several Hon. Members rose --
Mr. Clarke : I am still replying to my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Mr. Cash).
His questions lead me to the new rights granted under new paragraph K, including the extremely important right to vote and stand for election in certain elections. The right to vote and to stand for election is in municipal elections and in elections to the European Parliament in whichever member state the citizen resides. My firm opinion, and the advice that I have received, is that "municipal" does not mean national general elections.
Column 36
The choice of the word "municipal" in the relevant article was designed precisely to rule out elections to national Parliaments. If my hon. Friend is correct when he says that he has seen a judgment of the European Court which he believes leads to an interpretation of the word "municipal" as meaning national elections, I shall be happy to look at it and give it further consideration ; but, as I stand here, it is my firm belief that what we are talking about are local government elections, probably with effect from 1995, and the European Parliament elections in 1994.British citizens are thereby given the right to vote or to stand for election in those elections, if they are resident in another Community state--a right similar to the right that is given to Community nationals who are resident here.
Mr. Shepherd : Is it the Home Secretary's understanding that the Queen becomes a citizen of the union of Europe under the provisions of the Bill?
Mr. Marlow : Has she been asked?
Mr. Clarke : I shall give further consideration to that question, but I do not see why not.
Mr. Clarke : The Queen is undoubtedly a British national. She, being a national of the United Kingdom, is likely to become a citizen of the European union. [Interruption.] I shall reflect upon that point, but I very much suspect that that is the position. I do not believe that we should expand upon the position of the monarch at length, but I do not see why the Queen should be any more fearful of that prospect than anybody else is likely to be.
Mr. Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North) : On the question of citizenship and the right of people to vote in elections, is the Home Secretary aware that across the continent of Europe there are 15 million people who are not citizens of any European country but citizens of countries outside Europe--political refugees, economic migrants and so on-- who are denied any political rights in national elections in any country whatsoever? Does he not think that it is time that this aspect of prejudice against people who live and work in Europe was addressed?
Mr. Clarke : Every country obviously reserves the right to restrict its franchise to particular nationalities or citizens. We have always done that in this country. Voting in United Kingdom elections has always been open to citizens of the United Kingdom, citizens of the Irish Republic and certain Commonwealth citizens, but we do not give voting rights to other people who are nationals of other countries. Those who take up long- standing residence in this country and feel themselves to be deprived of the right to vote in general elections are always faced with the perfectly straightforward choice of whether to apply for British naturalisation, if they feel that they are excluded from--
Mr. Richard Shepherd : On a point of order, Mr. Morris. My understanding of the rules of the House of Commons is that, when anything touches upon the Queen's prerogative or upon the Queen's majesty, a Minister of the Crown brings a statement to the House attesting that the Queen herself has no objection to the provision. I should be grateful for your ruling, Sir.
Column 37
The Chairman : The point that the hon. Gentleman makes relates to the Second Reading or Third Reading of the Bill.
Several hon. Members rose --
Mr. Clarke : Let me make a little progress, and then I shall give way again, I am sure.
Mr. Shepherd : Further to that point of order, Mr. Morris. If that has not been signified at Second Reading, surely it has an implication for the subsequent Committee stage, when the Government go on to reduce or subordinate the Queen's position relative to the ultimate law-making authority within the Community, the European Court of Justice.
The Chairman : The hon. Gentleman will have studied the Order Paper and looked at page 3397, which clarifies the position.
Mr. Clarke : I am grateful to you, Mr. Morris. I do not believe that anything that I said touched upon the Queen's prerogative. I also believe that it has always been the position that the monarch of this country is subject to the law of this country, and has never sought to be otherwise.
Several hon. Members rose --
Mr. Clarke : Let me move on. There will be plenty of other opportunities for hon. Members to intervene.
We are at least beginning to deal with the practical rights which flow from European citizenship. I said that four new rights were established by this section of the treaty. The first is the right to vote in certain elections. The second is the right to consular protection in states where the member state of which a person is a national is not represented.
Dame Elaine Kellett-Bowman (Lancaster) : Does my right hon. and learned Friend recall that, under the treaty as it stands, the ex-leader of the Liberal party, the right hon. Member for Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale (Sir D. Steel), stood for election in Italy ?
Mr. Clarke : British citizens have done so. Several member states of the European Community will not have to change their law to comply with this provision. In the past, there has been a disparity in practice between the 12 member states. As a result of the agreement, the United Kingdom is proposing to give new rights to vote in, and to stand as candidates at, municipal and European elections, Personally, I see no objection to that, if someone has established his right to residence here, especially when one remembers that the same right will be extended to the leader of the British Liberal party not only in Italy but in every other member state once the provision is in place.
Mr. Nicholas Budgen (Wolverhampton, South-West) : I wonder whether my right hon. and learned Friend would be good enough to speak at some length on what he dismissed most airily as "the Danish point" in fearing a common European army. The preamble to the treaty clearly states that it was resolved
"to implement a common foreign and security policy including the framing of a common defence policy, which might in time lead to a common defence".
It is not obvious that, if citizens of the new united Europe are all able to vote for an increasingly powerful European Parliament, it would be irresponsible for them to be able to vote for war without having to bear the
| Next Section
| Home Page |