On Friday 24 January, the European Union (Referendum) Bill returned to Parliament for a first day at Committee stage in the House of Lords. Peers examined the first clause of the Bill, which includes scope, date and ballot question.
Lord Armstrong of Ilminster (CB) argued in favour of substituting the current ballot question put forward by Lord Dobbs (Con), sponsor of the Bill, which reads: “Do you think that the United Kingdom should be a member of the European Union?”, with the following proposal from the Electoral Commission: “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?”
Lord Armstrong claimed the question currently proposed in the Bill “is inappropriate, confusing and potentially misleading”. There has been some concern in the House, as expressed by Lord Quirk (CB), that a proportion of the electorate might not be aware that the UK is already part of the European Union. He added: “since 2000 there has been an even more dangerous source of confusion—the existence of the eurozone. How many British voters faced with the question in this Bill might interpret it as asking, ‘Should the UK be a member of the eurozone?’.”
Amendment 1 by Lord Armstrong was carried by 245 to 158.
Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Lab) was severely critical of the Bill, arguing that it “is a disgrace” and that the Bill is “trying to patch over divisions in the Tory party and trying to outflank the UK Independence Party—which deserves to be outflanked, by the way.”
Lord Roper (Lib Dem) suggested an amendment that would “seek to ensure that effective impact assessments are undertaken of the effect of the United Kingdom ceasing to be a member of the European Union.” According to Lord Roper, “it is necessary to provide the electorate with information on four matters”. He specifically argued for the provision of impact assessments on the UK economy, rights of individuals within the UK, foreign citizens living in the UK and fellow citizens living elsewhere in the EU.
Lord Roper’s amendment was carried by 183 to 57.
Due to Peers voting in favour of two amendments, the Bill must now return to the House of Commons. Opponents of the Bill have been accused of proposing an array of amendments in order to prevent it from being finalised within the time frame and becoming law. Despite the Bill being only 3 pages long, Peers tabled 81 amendments for discussion at Committee stage.
Further discussions will take place on Friday 31 January during the second day of Committee stage.