Anne Main voted for the EU Referendum Bill which would give the public a chance to vote on the UK’s relationship with Europe for the first time in over 40 years.

Anne backed the Second Reading of the Private Member’s Bill, which was supported by colleagues 283-0, and condemned opposition MPs for using Parliamentary procedure and the House of Lords to attempt stop the Bill.

After the debate, Anne said “I only just missed out on voting in the last referendum in 1975. That vote was on a Europe of a common market, building on relationships with European countries through trade and commerce; the Economic Community, not political union.

“It is high time, after 40 years without a vote, we let the British public have their say and settle this matter once and for all.”

Mrs Anne Main (St Albans) (Con): If every single Opposition Member who spoke about the awfulness of this Bill does not reinforce that with their vote today, the public can conclude that they are prepared to let the unelected House at the other end of this Building do their dirty work for them. I have heard from them today nothing good about this small Bill, which simply reinforces the public’s ability to make up their own mind when they have heard all the arguments, whether from business or politicians. Therefore, if those Opposition Members who desperately oppose this Bill do not vote today, they will show the hypocrisy of the Opposition, who prefer to let the other end do their dirty work for them.

| Hansard

| Parliament TV
 

Earlier interventions in the same debate

Mrs Anne Main (St Albans) (Con): Does my hon. Friend agree—he said this earlier—that many people say, “I might have voted for the EC, but I would not vote for this”? I think that people are entitled to say that they would like to have a vote again, because they may well have changed their opinions. They may not, but we should at least offer them the choice because what is now on the table is a very different animal.

Robert Neill: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. When I voted previously, I had campaigned to stay in what was then the European Community. I think that many people who voted for membership then would say that the world is very different now, the consequences are very different, and the pressures that have been placed on British business and a raft of our institutions are entirely different, and it is fair and legitimate to ask again.

| Hansard

...

Mrs Main: If the right hon. Gentleman does not support the Bill, then given that with some Liberal Democrat colleagues Labour Members could defeat it, why are they abstaining and allowing their cronies in the House of Lords to do their dirty work? Why do they not put their vote where their mouth is on this question?

Mr Alexander: With the greatest respect to the hon. Lady, she has never been my lodestar of political judgment, and I therefore think that Labour Members shall make the judgments in relation to the legislative passage of any Bill.

| Hansard

...

Mrs Main: None of the businesses my right hon. Friend mentions are advocating that people should not be given a choice; they are simply advocating what they would support should the people be given a choice.

Damian Green: I absolutely agree. As I said at the outset, I am strongly in favour of the Bill and will be voting for it for the second time in two years.

| Hansard

...

Mrs Main: With great respect to the right hon. Gentleman, I think that he is completely missing the point. That is not what the Bill is about. When the Bill is passed and the decision is made to have a referendum, we will listen to the voices of everyone, not just business, and an informed choice will be made. It could be “in” or it could be “out”, but the choice will be with the people. It will not be a case of listening beforehand to businesses which say “Do not give them a choice.”

Stephen Timms: I thank the hon. Lady for her intervention.

“Do I want an in/out referendum? No, I don’t, because I don’t think we should leave.”

| Hansard

Mrs Main: We do not know whether Labour Members are in favour of an in-out referendum, because they are not going to vote on it today—they have said they are not—but those of us on the Government Benches would like to give the people the choice. We do not care if there are different views—and there are different views on the right hon. Gentleman’s side, too—because we all have one vote, and the public will decide.

Stephen Timms: Well, I want to defend the view set out by the leader of the hon. Lady’s party. On 5 January 2010 in Hammersmith, shortly before he became Prime Minister and when he was leading the efforts of her and her hon. and right hon. Friends to be elected in the general election. He said:

“Do I want an in/out referendum? No, I don’t, because I don’t think we should leave”.

| Hansard

...

Mrs Main: I wonder when the damascene conversion came about, because in The Daily Telegraph in April 2014 the hon. Gentleman said:

“In order to exit the EU, we need David Cameron to be Prime Minister in 2017—the year when we will get the In/Out referendum, our chance to vote to leave the EU.”

So obviously it was between April and sometime recently.

Douglas Carswell: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for once again pointing out that when the facts change, I change my mind.

| Hansard

...

Mrs Main: The hon. Gentleman is making a deeply passionate speech about the flaws in the Bill. I can therefore guarantee that he will vote against it today. Or is he able to tell me otherwise?

Mike Gapes: The hon. Lady will have to wait and see whether there is a vote. I am waiting to see what happens. She will not have long to wait.

| Hansard