Previous SectionIndexHome Page


Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. The House must settle down.

Mr. O'Brien: The Chancellor's struggle is almost over. He says, "Yes, yes, yes." The Prime Minister says, "Maybe, maybe, maybe." The Tory party says, "Never, never, never." But the British people will say, "Enough, enough, enough--begone."

9.47 pm

The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Phillip Oppenheim): In a debate in which hon. Members have had 10 minutes to speak, the Opposition Front-Bench spokesman, the hon. Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. O'Brien), has taken 19 minutes to wind up. I hope that that will be noted.

My right hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr. Hurd) made a series of points with which few people would disagree. He stressed the importance of liberalisation, and said that he was against a united states of Europe and for a referendum on a single currency. Most hon. Members, including my right hon. Friends the Members for Honiton (Sir P. Emery), for Conwy

11 Dec 1996 : Column 375

(Sir W. Roberts), for Guildford (Mr. Howell), and for Mid-Sussex (Mr. Renton) and my hon. Friend the Member for Wycombe (Mr. Whitney), would not disagree with that and made similar good points.

My hon. Friends the Members for South Derbyshire (Mrs. Currie) and for Gillingham (Mr. Couchman) made some good and important points about the success of inward investment into Britain in recent years.

My right hon. Friend the Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Sir E. Heath) said that the float of sterling in 1992 was a cheat. I think that he implied that markets were cheats, but I do not wish to dwell too long on that aspect. He stressed the need to remain positive members of the European Union, and most hon. Members would agree with that.

My right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Thames (Mr. Lamont), together with my hon. Friends the Members for East Lindsey (Sir P. Tapsell) and for Stafford (Mr. Cash) made a series of points from a slightly different angle. Nevertheless, I found plenty to agree with in their comments, although I shall not dwell on them in detail.

My right hon. Friend and predecessor, the Member for Wells (Mr. Heathcoat-Amory), asked whether the transitional costs of moving to a single currency would be taken into account and whether a compliance cost assessment had been made.

Mr. Heathcoat-Amory rose--

Mr. Oppenheim: As time is limited, I would appreciate it if I could answer the point. The Government have made it clear that their decision on whether or not to go forward into a single currency will take account of a large number of factors. Transitional costs will be one of those factors. A compliance cost assessment will be made in due course.

Mr. Heathcoat-Amory: Will my hon. Friend give way?

Mr. Oppenheim: I hope my right hon. Friend will forgive me. I have very little time. [Hon. Members: "Answer the question."] I have done my best to do so. Very well. I give way.

Mr. Heathcoat-Amory: The Government published a White Paper promising a compliance cost assessment for any regulations brought before the House affecting business costs. Regulations were submitted to the House three weeks ago without a compliance cost assessment. Will my hon. Friend undertake to correct that deficiency at an early date, and not next year?

Mr. Oppenheim: With respect to my right hon. Friend, my point is still valid. Those regulations will not apply to Britain unless we make a decision to go into the single currency. At that point, if necessary, a compliance cost assessment will be made.

The hon. Member for Streatham (Mr. Hill) attacked with great vehemence a document entitled "Europe isn't working". He called its claims myths. That document was signed by 50 of his colleagues.

Mr. MacShane: They are all going.

Mr. Oppenheim: That is an interesting insight into the unity on the Opposition Benches.

11 Dec 1996 : Column 376

The hon. Member for North Warwickshire said in his long peroration that his party had sensible and reasoned debates on these matters. The comments of the hon. Members for Streatham and for Rotherham (Mr. MacShane) are the denial incarnate of that.

The hon. Member for Streatham said that a single currency would not reduce sovereignty. He said that EMU means lower interest rates, so we should join. How does he know that EMU will mean lower interest rates? We will not know that until we know whether the criteria are being fiddled with and meddled with. That is why the Government's policy of negotiating and waiting until we are clear on these matters is the right policy.

Mr. Marlow: Will my hon. Friend give way?

Mr. Oppenheim: I hope my hon. Friend will forgive me. We have limited time. I shall try to give way later.

The right hon. Member for Bethnal Green and Stepney (Mr. Shore) came in from a slightly different side of the pitch. He said that he did not want foreigners telling us what to do. For an old socialist, there was not much of the brotherhood of man about his comments, but I know that they represent the views of some of his colleagues.

The hon. Member for Ilford, South (Mr. Gapes), by contrast, said that we should go into EMU at all costs. The hon. Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Winnick) said that we should not go in at any cost. The right hon. Member for Llanelli (Mr. Davies) said that those who want to go into EMU will use any trick to get into EMU. The hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, West (Mr. Randall), who wants to go into EMU, is probably one of those to whom the right hon. Gentleman was referring.

The hon. Member for North Durham (Mr. Radice) said that Euro-sceptics are dangerous. I assume that he includes in his list the right hon. Members for Llanelli and for Bethnal Green and Stepney, and the hon. Member for Walsall, North, who are Euro-sceptics.

Mr. Cash rose--

Mr. Oppenheim: I hope that my hon. Friend will forgive me for a moment or two longer. I shall give way in a moment.

The hon. Member for Rotherham persists in getting my title wrong, although tonight's performance was a slight improvement on his last effort, when he called me the Posthorn General. He said that I was a Euro-sceptic and therefore I was hostile to Europe. He is right in one respect. I am a Euro-sceptic. That does not necessarily mean that one is hostile to Europe. It means that one is sceptical about Europe. One is pragmatic about Europe. [Interruption.] That is not the same thing.

Several hon. Members rose--

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. The House must settle down. The Minister must be given a reasonable hearing.

Mr. Cash rose--

Mr. Oppenheim: I give way to my hon. Friend.

Mr. Cash: Does my hon. Friend--who, of course, is a Euro-sceptic; we are sure of that--accept that anyone who says:

11 Dec 1996 : Column 377


is saying something that is inconsistent with Government policy? Has he noted the advertisement placed by the European Movement, bearing the names of a lot of people who are blaming the Euro-realists but who themselves are inconsistent with Government policy?

Mr. Oppenheim: We Euro-sceptics really should stick together, but I do not necessarily agree with my hon. Friend's premise.

All that this shows is that all the political parties are having a vigorous discussion. There are people who say that we should not have a vigorous discussion, but I think that they are wrong. This is far the most significant issue that we have faced in my 14 years in this place; it is one of the most pivotal issues since the war, and probably in this century. Many people say that it is as important as our decision to join the Community.

I know that many hon. Members feel that it is wrong in principle for us to go into EMU, and that we should say so now. Others take a different view. Whatever the view, the fact is that a single currency will affect us, whether we are in or out.

Some people say that we could just sit on the sidelines and gain some atavistic, mercantilist pleasure from any mess caused by an EMU based on skewed and muddled criteria. Some say that we may even gain advantage from such a mess on the continent--a kind of "capitalism in one country". I am not sure that they are right. More than half our exports go to Europe; United Kingdom companies are major investors in Europe, and vice versa; monetary and political chaos in Europe would probably lead to an over-strong or at least a volatile pound. We must also protect the position of the City, one of our most successful industries.

Those are all reasons why we must be at the negotiations, and why we cannot make a decision until the final shape of EMU is clear. At that point we do have the option to say no, and, even if any Government decided that it was in Britain's interest to go in, the British people would have the final say through a referendum. That is the right policy.

Mr. Marlow rose--

Mr. Oppenheim: I know that my hon. Friend is dying to get in, so I will give way, but this is absolutely the last time that I shall do so.

Mr. Marlow: I am grateful to my hon. Friend.

Constituents say to me, "Mr. Marlow"--[Hon. Members: "Mr. Marlow!"] Actually, they call me Tony. "Tony," they say, "if we were to join the single currency,

11 Dec 1996 : Column 378

would that mean not only that we would lose the pound but that our interest rates would be decided overseas, and that eventually our taxation system would probably be taken over the Europeans?" They say, "Tony, does this effectively mean that we would cease to exist as a nation state?" I reply, "Yes, I believe that that is the case, but I can do better than that: I can ask my hon. Friend the Minister." Does my hon. Friend agree as well?


Next Section

IndexHome Page