Market matters
Sir: "Small ... seems to be the prospect of converting a pro-referendum man to the opposite side, or vice versa," says Mr Cosgrave in his Political Commentary of August 24. Nevertheless, I have been converted — from pro to anti. Mr Cosgrave may feel that the reasons he advances in favour Of a referendum are 'compelling': but I have been persuaded that the reasons against are .overwhelming.
Firstly, to hold a referendum would in itself be an abrogation of parliamentary sovereignty and Mr Cosgrave's proposals in no way mitigate this. He may claim that the issue is of 'transcendent' importance and therefore need not be taken as a precedent for holding referenda on other subjects. He may be right; but, would this exclude us from having another referendum on the same subject in a few years time if public opinion changed? And again, if public opinion were to change once more, ad infinitum? Furthermore, if British adherence to another treaty deemed to be of transcendent importance were to be mooted at some stage in the future — would we not also have to have a referendum on that? Is he advocating foreign policy by popular whim? Mr Cosgrave admits that the "decision for 'or against the Market is one utterly decisive for the future of this country." However, he does not appear to recognise the rider to the statement — that therefore, virtually the whole of government policy will revolve around its opinion of the likelihood of continued EEC membership. In the event of an adverse vote, the government will fall because it will be impossible to implement its policies. Accordingly, the issue of the Common Market cannot be decided in glorious isolation from other issues. Indeed, this will probably be recognised by the electorate and the referendum be taken as an Opportunity to pass a verdict on the government's policies as a whole rather than on the nominal issue.
Secondly, there is the constitutional problem of what will happen to the doctrine of collective responsibility if a referendum were to be held?
Thirdly, what will the result of a low turn-out poll prove? It does not seem to have occurred to Mr Cosgrave that by the time a referendum could be held, the electorate may have had a surfeit of elections and, anyway, may not feel as strongly about the issue as he does. Members of Parliament are elected to keep more closely in touch with political realities than is possible for the electorate as a whole. They are paid to vote wisely on all the issues that come before Parliament and their vote on an issue like the Common Market cannot be viewed in isolation from their votes on other major subjects. The electorate has a constitutional opportunity to pass judgment on their voting records as a whole and it isn't through referenda. If Mr Cosgrave feels that this is inadequate and would like to express his view on the matter directly; may I draw his attention to another facility that our Constitution provides to this end — namely for him to stand for election to Parliament.
Richard Reid 30 Love Lane, Pinner, Middlesex
Previous page
