Liaison Committee Evidence Session with the Prime Minister
Liaison Committee Evidence Session with the Prime Minister on EU Referendum
The second House of Commons Liaison Committee evidence session with the Prime Minister since the May 2015 general election took place on 4 May. It focused solely on the EU Referendum.
The Liaison Committee is made up of all the select committee chairs and this was the second time the new committee had questioned David Cameron since the general election last May. The topic for the session was the EU Referendum. The Prime Minister had reluctantly agreed to appear, having been wary of making any commitment to attend another committee session before the summer when he appeared in January. Little notice was given of the session, but it proved both an opportunity for the Prime Minister to present his case for remaining in the EU and a chance for Eurosceptic MPs to challenge him. Again Chair Andrew Tyrie proved combative and interventionist in his management of the evidence session.
The transcript of the full committee hearing is available on the Parliament website and the TV recording here
Researcher on the Prime Ministerial Accountability project, Shayne Halfpenny-Ray, has compiled a review of the media coverage of the session, below.
The overwhelming focus of the 4th May Liaison Committee (LC) meeting was on the upcoming question of the EU referendum; the Prime Minister’s (PM) reluctance to attend was also noted. Many articles or blogs cite key quotes or exchanges between Committee members and the PM. The main responses have been neutral, although a few negative comments about the Liaison Committee’s ability to hold Cameron to account were either stated or implied. Due to the membership of the Liaison Committee a plurality can be observed in questions directed to the Prime Minister, covering a number of areas including (not exclusively):
- The failure of Cameron’s proposed treaty changes
- The question of resignation following an Out victory.
- National Security implications of leaving the EU.
- The possibility of Turkey’s membership and Cameron’s changed opinion upon it.
- Scottish independence referendum right if the Out campaign is successful.
Hannah White – Institute for Government:
Hannah White offered an interesting commentary on the lead up to the latest Liaison Committee meeting, citing specific public exchanges which represent a certain unwillingness to attend on the part of the Prime Minister. She stated that discussing the EU membership question is a rational subject that should be scrutinised in a committee setting, and the Liaison Committee is the optimal setting instead of the PM attending a variety of individual committees.
Whilst citing a number of strong arguments for attending the LC and for the topic on EU membership to be held at such a location, she was also able to highlight an extremely pertinent point. That being, how the PM’s attendance, despite his own misgivings, displays the growing political power that Parliament’s Liaison Committee now holds under its new chair.
http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/13665/the-prime-minister-and-the-liaison-committee/
PoliticsHome:
There was a brief mention of Cameron’s appearance at the Liaison Committee. However, there was a rather negative reference to the Committee, doing nothing to help underline its importance.
http://www.expressandstar.com/news/uk-news/2016/05/04/tony-blair-rational-voters-will-heed-obamas-brexit-warning/
There were a number of overlapping and key themes explored during the session on 4th May. The following provides a summary of topics and discussions of the LC’s role where applicable, with links to the respective news/blog sources.
Failure of Cameron’s EU treaty changes:
Under the guise of the EU referendum scrutiny, the Liaison Committee was an apt place for discussion of the deal negotiated with the EU by David Cameron in order to promote European Union reform. These negotiations were not overlooked, with Sir William Cash, a well-known Eurosceptic, attacking David Cameron’s promises. The Telegraph going as far to say that he was taken to task by the veteran Eurosceptic MP; Cash stated Cameron’s treaty negotiations package were a failure. He went on to attack the veracity of the claims that they were successful on the basis of them being reversible and thus, no fundamental changes would occur by the time voters hit the polls in June
Cameron refuted this suggestion and went on to say that the real disagreement is between them personally stating he believes in remaining in a reformed EU and Sir Cash wishes to leave. He also made it clear that voting should be done without a partisan mind, it shouldn’t be a case of weighting politicians or people’s futures against one another, it should be about the future of Britain within Europe. The Telegraph, whilst not commenting on the Liaison Committee itself, referred to the drama of the occasion.
The question of resignation following an Out victory:
For reference, both the Express & Star, and Daily Mail articles were virtually identical and so the content summarised below comes from both. It seemed that MP Frank Field was incredulous over the prospect of David Cameron staying on as PM following an unsuccessful Remain campaign. There was also a discussion on the Remain campaign using fear tactics to underline its position. The PM was also insistent that he does not regret promising the referendum as he said he was a great believer in democracy. The question of the EU and national security UK security with reference to measures such as Europol and the European Arrest Warrant, which, in his eyes, were impossible to re-join if the UK were to leave the EU. This mention of security was then challenged by Meg Hillier MP, who asked if calling for a referendum in the first place was a threat to the security we have by questioning our place in the EU. Cameron avoided answering this question. Cameron was often on the back foot over key issues and the session underlined the value of the Liaison Committee meetings. Neither article really delved into the nuance of the Liaison Committee, only offering a play by play overview for their readership.
The question of Turkey and EU membership:
A number of news sources caught David Cameron’s blunt assessment of the prospects of a Turkish EU member state. He stated that it would not happen for many years, and is not even a remote issue on the cards. The Guardian also picked up on demands for the government to remove its pro-remain posts on government websites during purdah, and an exchange of letters is expected about the issue.
Russia Today stated the PM was grilled, and even displayed public tweets, some of which mentioned scrutiny shifting from the House to the committees, and others questioning the ability of the Committee to effectively scrutinise the PM. One tweet even called the Committee hopeless.
The BBC and PoliticsHome articles were neutral in comparison. In this case there were clear issues with the LC’s effectiveness, however, some of it stems from the belief that the House is unable to hold the PM to account and the frustration over a majority Eurosceptic panel for this topic was not missed.
Scottish Independence:
The Liaison Committee became a central piece in the Herald Scotland, due to the Scottish MP Pete Wishart suggested that should the UK leave the EU, but a majority of Scottish voters vote to stay, they would have the mandate to request a second independence referendum.
This topic was also picked up by RT, where on tweet mocked the question altogether. The BBC also covered the topic. Minus the mocking tweet in the RT, the other articles provided a neutral description of events and no comment about the LC itself was made.
Highlighting the growing awareness of Liaison Committee Meetings:
Following on the theme of addressing the LC’s media coverage, there was a small mention of the LC in a politically left campaign press release for the War on Want. Whilst the article is a short attack on Cameron’s failures over TTIP and preaches the need for MPs to vote on its future, it is important to examine that even the more niche news sources are beginning to cover LC content
The small right-wing online Daily Globe however, offers the most explicit mention of the Liaison Committee proceedings. The article mentions David Cameron’s reluctance to attend, and notes the chair’s disappointment at this prospect. It suggests the strength of the Committee’s will for the PM to attend and their ability to follow this through. It goes on to discuss how the Committee system works. The author lists the different questions and attacks Cameron faced, however he goes on to say how eloquently the PM dodged questions with all the airs and graces of Tony Blair, and how he constantly employed spin tactics. Whilst the article critiques, Cameron and the Brexit question more than the Liaison Committee, it may be indicative of the author’s contempt for Cameron’s performance to suggest the inability for the LC to handle him. The reference to Tony Blair only strengthens this implication as he was also notoriously difficult to handle within Liaison Committee meetings.