Calls for a referendum on the EU constitution have been voted out by MPs.

Government whips took the rare step on Wednesday to gather Labour backbenchers and overturn a 10 minute-rule bill being championed in the Commons by former Treasury minister John Maples.

MPs rejected by 233 votes to 145 a bill that traditionally passes through unopposed on its first reading.

Maples had told ePolitix.com that a referendum was vital to settle Britain's attitude to Europe.

"Although I would campaign 'no' and vote 'no', I would accept a 'yes' vote. I think the important thing is to make this decision as a nation," he said.

"It will set the tone and direction of British foreign and economic policy for a generation. I don't think we can continue in this current muddle that we're in."

The Conservative frontbench is set to continue with its campaign for a poll following the appointment of Michael Howard as the new party leader.

Liberal Democrats have also urged the prime minister to call a vote. Tony Blair is known to be under growing pressure from his own backbenchers - both in favour and against the constitution.

But the government's whips orchestrated a show of strength to signal the government's determination not to cave in.

Pro-European Labour backbencher Chris Bryant challenged Maples and the Conservative record on EU issues.

"It's particularly interesting that we have the Tory leadership arguing for a referendum. They didn't argue for one when it came to Maastricht," he said.

"That included the member for Folkestone and Hyde [Michael Howard] who not only argued forcibly against a referendum, but he was practically manhandling people through the lobbies.

"The truth is the Conservatives want a referendum for nakedly opportunistic reasons so as to start a complete unilateral re-negotiation of all the treaties. All they're really talking about is withdrawal."

Ahead of the debate, Maples had argued that then-prime minister John Major should have considered a vote on the Maastricht treaty.

"John Major got opt-outs on the two big things in the treaty - the single currency and the social chapter - so the main things didn't affect us," he said.

"The fact that there wasn't one then seems to add to the argument for having one now, rather than detract from it.

"Now is as good a time as any to have a referendum."

Maples rejected the government's claim that the constitution is simply a tidying up exercise.

"Quite a lot of other countries are having referendums. The French prime minister has said there should be one. Spain, Portugal, Holland, Denmark, Ireland and Luxembourg are definitely having one," he said.

"This is a huge step in the direction of communitising various things and we're losing our veto in a lot of areas. People can't pretend this isn't a big step along the road."

He conceded that part of the government's reluctance to hold a vote was that voters could use it to deliver a mid-term kicking.

"Referendums can be used like that, it's perfectly true, but I think this is sufficiently important issue that, hopefully, the debate could be elevated above that," he said.

"I think it would be more likely to happen if the government was in a phase when it was very unpopular. With this government, it's quite unpopular but not very unpopular."