The Lisbon Treaty

[Ric.ror]

Did the uk sign the Lisbon treaty and if they did were we promised a referendum before they signed it? If so by which PM - and what was the reason they gave that the ref never took place

Many thanks

[fiction-factory]

Gordon Brown signed it for UK

[fiction-factory]

Blair initially said there wouldn't be a referendum, then there would, then there wouldn't.
Long story that was never fully explained I recall . This may help. Parliament accepted it anyway and of course (as we now know) that trumps any referendum anyway.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_European_Constitution_referendum

[fiction-factory]

Ireland had two referendums on it - but gave the wrong answer first time so it was re-voted on. Same happened somewhere else (Netherlands?)

[New Judge]

Yes the UK did sign it.
No, the electorate was not promised a referendum.
Prime Minister Gordon Brown, along with David Miliband (the then Foreign Secretary) signed it on behalf of the UK. Mr Miliband attended the ceremony alone. Prime Minister Gordon Brown was "otherwise engaged".
A referendum was promised before the Treaty's predecessor - the European Constitution - was ratified. Two countries - France and Holland - rejected the referendum so it was effectively dead. The UK's referendum was therefore postponed indefinitely. The Constitution was resurrected under the guise of the Lisbon Treaty (with basically just the heading changed) and it was decided that no referendum was necessary in the UK because the Treaty was not a "constitution".

[jim360]

NJ is more or less right but I am not sure I'd agree that the Treaty of Lisbon was the same as the Constitution but with a different title. It does make a difference whether it is a "Treaty" (ie, an agreement between member states) or a "Constitution" (which would be a single document that more or less founded the "State" of Europe, equivalent to the US Constitution). A lot of the content was indeed the same, but the effect and status of the two approaches are different.

[ToraToraTora]

the main reason is that the silly public could give the "wrong" answer! Then there'd be a right kerfuffle.....hang on!

[jim360]

Quite. :)

I'm fairly sure that the whole kerfuffle over holding a referendum, or not, about the Constitution/Lisbon Treaty was part of my motivation for supporting the idea of a referendum being held prior to 2016. I think it's safe to say that I've learned my lesson!

[New Judge]

//NJ is more or less right but I am not sure I'd agree that the Treaty of Lisbon was the same as the Constitution but with a different title. It does make a difference whether it is a "Treaty" (ie, an agreement between member states) or a "Constitution" (which would be a single document that more or less founded the "State" of Europe, equivalent to the US Constitution).//

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....

[Old_Geezer]

Lesson learnt. Next time hold one before signing up to Maastricht, then Lisbon might not be an issue.