Cable and Davey quiz Miliband re the Irish referendum

7.57.48pm BST (GMT +0100) Tue 24th Jun 2008

' . . does the Foreign Secretary agree with me that when the German and French Governments said that the Irish verdict could be overridden or ignored, it was both arrogant and unacceptable? '

[June 16] Vincent Cable (Deputy Party Leader; Twickenham, Liberal Democrat): As someone who voted for the treaty, does the Foreign Secretary agree with me that when the German and French Governments said that the Irish verdict could be overridden or ignored, it was both arrogant and unacceptable? Has he communicated that feeling to them?

David Miliband (Secretary of State, Foreign & Commonwealth Office; South Shields, Labour): I hope that the hon. Gentleman will send me those quotations. I have talked to the French and German Foreign Ministers about this and I have read the statements of Chancellor Merkel and President Sarkozy, and the hon. Gentleman's suggestion does not accord with what I have read or heard from those two countries. In fact, since Friday, the European debate has been notable for the absence of any rush to judgment and for the fact that leaders-whether they be from France or anywhere else, including this country-are not saying that Ireland should be bulldozed. I would like to see the quotations on which he has based his assertion.

. . Edward Davey (Shadow Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Foreign & Commonwealth Affairs; Kingston & Surbiton, Liberal Democrat): I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement and for coming to the House so quickly. While many in Britain, including the Liberal Democrats, find it difficult to see any way in which to continue with the Lisbon treaty, would not it be wrong to be seen to anticipate discussions with our European partners? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is not in Britain's national interest to be perceived as prejudging this weekend's summit?

Will the Foreign Secretary confirm to the House the process whereby the UK ratifies all treaties, including Lisbon, and state whether a treaty is ratified by a Third Reading vote in one House of Parliament or through Crown prerogative? If the Government proceed with Third Reading in the Lords and Royal Assent this week, do they intend to withhold depositing the instrument of ratification in Rome until after the European summit?

The questions that the Irish vote raises are posed to us all, whether we are pro or anti-Lisbon. If the treaty of Lisbon falls, the European Union may well have to manage under the institutional arrangements that have worked adequately for the past seven years. They are bequeathed by the Nice treaty, which the right hon. Member for Richmond, Yorks (Mr. Hague) said at the time would be "a disaster". Whether the European Union's operation is to be based on Nice or Lisbon, is not our immediate challenge to obtain a decision, one way or the other, at the forthcoming summit and thus avoid further delay and uncertainty?

Whatever the frustrations and difficulties caused by the loss of Lisbon, could not the cause of European co-operation be much more seriously damaged by yet another protracted period of member states being distracted by institutional debate or talk of a two or three-speed Europe?

With or without Lisbon, in a world of uncertainty and danger, Britain's national interest remains in the European Union, playing a positive role. It is time for the European Union to focus all its energy on the agenda of economic reform, climate change and tackling terrorism. The Foreign Secretary's job now is to ensure that Britain plays that constructive role in Europe so that Europe's benefits become ever clearer to the peoples of Europe.

David Miliband (Secretary of State, Foreign & Commonwealth Office; South Shields, Labour): I will start with the hon. Gentleman's last point: the way in which the European Union can bridge the gap between politicians and people, whether nationally or at European level, is to ensure that it focuses on the issues that matter to people. International issues such as energy and climate change, migration and terrorism are precisely those that the European Union should address.

The hon. Gentleman asked about prejudging discussions at the weekend. It is important to proceed with ratification because the Lisbon treaty is good for Britain-among other things, it increases our voting weight. I do not believe that he meant ratification when he referred to prejudging the outcome. We should certainly not prejudge what Prime Minister Cowan will report.

The hon. Gentleman asked a technical question. Royal Assent means the enactment of a Bill-the turning of a Bill into an Act. As article 6 of the treaty states, ratification depends on the deposit by all 27 countries of the ratification articles in Rome. Clearly, that will not happen before the European Council this Thursday and Friday.

As for the fast track to institutional debate, as I said earlier, the Nice treaty left the number of commissioners unresolved. That is one of the things that the Lisbon treaty was created to resolve, and it did that. If Lisbon does not come into force, one consequence is that the institutional debate about the number of commissioners will restart.