Why can't the people have their say?

Mike

If team GB thought they could win a referendum, then they would hold it. They (rightly) think they can't win it, so they won't hold it. Nuff said. It will be sadly, a small issue in the 2009/10 election. But adds further confirmation that Brown is an untrustworthy and calculating politician who is treating the public as fools.

nick humfrey

I'm sure you've made this abunduntly clear somewhere else but can I just clarify what the Spectator's position is exactly. Is it a) there should be a referendum because Labour promised one in their manifesto. If they hadn't then there would be no need for a referundum or b) there should be always be a referundum when there's a new EU treaty, the failure to do this in the past is a democratic failure which should now be rectified. Also if a referendum is called does the Spectator believe the Conservatives should oppose it and, if so, why exactly?

Max Kaye

James, The ability of this PM - and his acolytes -to brazenly lie about the EU treaty and Nu Labour's promise of a referendum (and most other things) is very frustrating. I'll save my powder until I've calmed down. I don't want to make a habit of posting intemperate or abusive comments.

Tiberius

So Brown has decided to opt for the fight against a whole array of allied anti-treaty groupings. He has refused the side-exit opportunity of red lines being crossed. He must think he can win the parliamentary vote because a defeat risks huge political fall-out. He must therefore think he can persuade enough of his own party's rebels to vote with him. A calculating politician? Well he got the election business all wrong.

David Lindsay

Such a referendum would deliver a Yes vote. In 1975, the federalists managed to convince two thirds of the electorate that they were merely voting for "a free trade area" called "the Common Market", even though the first clause of the European Communities Act was, and is, a textbook definition of a federal state. That was achieved by persistently putting up Tony Benn and Enoch Powell to state the case for a No vote. Most people voted instead for the position espoused by politicians with whom they felt more comfortable. The same thing would happen again. Powell's place would be filled by that nasty fringe which holds his economic views untempered by his romantic Toryism. Such would be the sole No campaigners on at least two out of every three, and quite possibly three out of every four, programmes. The rest of the time, Benn would be back. Even fewer people would identify with Benn now than in 1975. And do even tribal Tories, never mind anybody else, believe in unrestricted immigration to feed unbridled capitalism? Or in the total deregulation of alcohol, gambling and pornography? Or in the legalisation of drugs and prostitution? Or in the wholesale privatisation of health, education and pensions? Or in the abolition of farm subsidies? "Well, then," the federalists would say, "what makes you think that you agree with these people about this, and this alone? Their position is coherent. It all fits together. And your views don't fit into it at all. Vote Yes, if only because they want you to Vote No." And people would. Instead, Parliament should do its duty by throwing out the Constitreaty without any need for a referendum. Not least, the unions should be refusing to fund any MP who did not vote in Parliament both against the Constitreaty and in favour of securing workers' rights (among other things) through the Parliament of the United Kingdom, and should instead be undertaking to fund alternative parliamentary candidates who will do both of those things. For we do not need the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. We need a proper party dedicated to securing workers' rights (among other things) through the Parliament of the United Kingdom. And now, we have just such a party: see my blog.

Vincenzo Rampulla

The TG-A article is a good, clear piece of writing. The key Conservative argument for having a referendum (though they've strangely been immune to arguments for referenda themselves before) is that it will give people the opportunity to show they're trust in the Government. But given the state of election turnout, the lack of understanding of the EU and the ammending treaty on the table (thanks to both political parties)...what hope is there of a proper showing at such a vote. Just a motivated minority taking advantage...again.

Frank Leader

David Milliband is descended from Communist stock. Gordon Brown is almost one. So keep the serfs in their place, don't allow them a referendum.