What the Tories will say after the Irish vote

Fatbloke on tour

I see the South Sea Bubble defence is being used by the Tories to define what they will do if the treaty has been completely ratified.

Arrogance beyond belief if they think that will hold.

Davie really is a "Referendum Teaser" on this.
All talk and no action as he is on so many things.

Interesting to hear the response in SpectatorLand when they find out they have been led up the garden path.

chris as usual

Having received a battering on this blog yesterday by trying to play down the Europe issue, I am certain that if coffeehousers are typical Tory supporters then we will have to have a referendum if the Tories win the election.

Quite what that referendum will ask I am not sure. It would be a mistake to bounce the party into a first term riddled with disagreement about Europe when there are far more important matters to be sorting out.

WitteringsfromWitney

So yet more prevarication/avoidance/wriggling then - what is new?

Cameron should be reminded of his 2007 statement, that contained no 'ifs'. 'buts' or 'maybes' that when PM he would give a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty!

And politicians wonder why they have sunk to such a low in the estimation of the public - due entirely to the public not being able to reply on promises or guarantees!

Sally Chatterjee

I wouldn't pay this much atttention. Few care about the Lisbon process.

This will be a test as to whether the Conservative Party can show it's interested in the same issues as most voters (economy, health, education, standards in public life etc) or if it gets into a frenzy over an issue it can't change.

The Huntsman

The witching hour draws nigh.......

As they plan to defy the wishes of The People (which is for a referendum come what may)they are running out of fudge.

We are tired of being ignored by the political class.

Let the tumbrels roll!

Aux armes, citoyens!

MaxSceptic

If Tories don't offer a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty irrespective of whether or not it has been adopted by all member states, I will vote for a party that will.

crappy little country, crappy people in it?

What we need to learn from the Irish vote is that the Pro-Europeans are very good at frightening and threatening people into agreeing with them. We know that the EU will lie and cheat any way that it can to get what it wants. Why would Cameron invite that sort of opposition before an election? We have seen mass interference by the EU in the Irish vote, why would Cameron want to provoke this level of scare-mongering all in aid of the Labour party?

Carroll Barry-Walsh

I'd have thought that one point they will want to make, over and over, is that the British have been denied - by Labour and the Lib Dems the referendum they were promised.

Privately, they need to work out exactly what they propose doing e.g. telling the EU that - at a time when a Tory government will be making public expenditure cuts/tax rises they cannot justify paying £50 mio per day to an organisation that does not adopt basic double-entry book-keeping and has not had its accounts signed off for however many years and, therefore, payments to the EU will be suspended until the following things are obtained PDQ. Plus they should make clear that they will only adopt those EU laws which are compatible with British interests / British principles e.g. no loss of trial by jury whatever the EU might say, no trials in absentia, the European Arrest Warrant to be enforced in the UK only if the other state makes a prima facie case etc, (and while they're about it the Extradition Treaty with the US should be suspended), no non-British police on our streets etc etc. Equally, they need to make clear to the civil service here that the gold-plating of EU laws must stop and they should drag their feet over those Directives they object to. In my experience, the UK is altogether too quick and too thorough in its implementation and other countries take their time, do the minimum necessary or do so in a manner which benefits them. Even if ultimately they lose the court case they never pay the fine. In short, make it clear that they will be as bloody-minded as needs be in Britain's interests and much cannier in how/whether they implement EU laws which, frankly, is what other countries do. And make clear that if we are not satisfied, then there is always the option of an In/Out referendum.

This may not be the full frontal fight that others may desire but sometimes a zig-zag approach may be better, especially in the Tories' first term when, frankly, they will have other things to concentrate on.

James J

The EU issue in British politics will not go away because there is a large proportion of the electorate who don’t want Britain to remain a member.
The problem for the political class is that the electorate no longer accept arguments about the danger to our trade with the Union (we run a deficit with them) the risk to jobs (see the trade deficit) or even the proportion of our economy involved with the EU (about 10% although 100% incur the cost of regulations.)Sooner or later we will have a Referendum on membership and this one will be on membership of a Federal Union not a Common Market. But then as the second referendum in Ireland proves ,not even they are binding if the “Wrong” decision is made.

David Lindsay

If Cameron really were against Lisbon, then he would simply promise not to ratify it, without any need of a referendum. He doesn't, and he won't, because he isn't.

Drakes Drum.

Of course it will not be enough. They will be eaten up and spat out by the media and press.

If for the last months they have not worked out what their position will be, God help this Country if they win. We will be substituting one Government that cannot make decisions for yet another!

David Cameron had better be honest, open and declare one way or another. IF he says that is it, The Lisbon treaty is ratified then we must accept it, he will lose a lot of support. But if he tries to dance on the wire and avoid answering the question he will lose much more support.

People want to see honesty.

Although I am desperate for a referendum, I would just blame Brown and Clegg for their refusal to hold a referendum. Reminding people that Clegg could have arranged for his colleagues in the House of Lords to back a referendum.

Publius

I think Mr Cameron is aware that this is not just some non-issue that will go away. Time and time again we have been told that this or that concession is a this-far-and-no-further moment. And time and time again that has proved to be a lie. The latest was Blair's handing back the British rebate in return for a promise, conveniently postponed until 2009, to do something about CAP.

And guess what? 2009 came along, and it was quietly decided by the Eurocrats that now was not, after all, a convenient time to revisit CAP. Too disruptive, and other blah.

By which time, of course, our rebate was long gone.

For all my strong words elsewhere on this list, I do still maintain my respect for Mr Cameron. I think he is intelligent enough to realise that this question is not going to drift off, and I also think he realises that if he tries to hookwink us, as Blair and Brown thought they were so clever in doing, then there will be massive trouble, that will, in the end, bring him down.

Hawkeye

I honestly do not know why they do not simply hold the referendum whether Lisbon is ratified or not. Let us have our say.

If it is ratified and they get a good turnout then they have something to bash the EU with. If the turnout is poor then they can say that we had our chance and blew it.

I cannot understand why they will not simply hold the referendum.

Paul Hughes

I'm extremely euro-sceptic and tend towards the "let's get out" end of the argument. Still, I tend to be realistic and trust the tories' scepticism.

Nonetheless, I am extremely tempted to vote UKIP on this occasion. We have been treated extremely poorly by the political elites on the issue of our own referendum.

I'm helped by the fact that Henley is so safe that my protest vote wouldn't risk robbing the tories of their win. Still, I really do want this juggernaut of undemocratic despotism dealt with, before it truly is too late.

And so, I am a pragmatic EU hater and hope that the tories' stance doesn't do them any damage in areas where UKIP could rob them of majorities. Getting that disgusting cretin, Brown, out of power is of more immediate importance.

verysmallurl

not good enough. this is either important enough for a referendum or its not. if it is, the Irish vote should be irrelevant and the Cameroons must nail their colours to the mast. I don't think they realise how core their response just now is, to people's final voting behaviours come the time. I'm watching this space very keenly indeed - and I don't think I"m the only one.

Emil

Big problem for the Tories. Mandy and the quisling party will no longer have any need to keep the discredited puppet leader in power any longer.

Denis Cooper

Do you think they might say anything about the kind of EU they really want, and how they would work to achieve it?

We know that they want us to stay in the EU, but what sort of EU?

Are they happy with an EU like the present EU?

Which seems to exist primarily to gather more and more power unto itself, which has no scruples about bullying smaller countries into line while holding back from trying to do the same with larger countries, and which can't be relied upon to respect the rule of its own law, and so on?

J H Holloway

Norway has this sorted.

It is not a member of the EU, but is wired into the debates through its admirably small 'mission' to the EU, which is made up of about 50 people.

http://www.eu-norway.org/eu/norway_and_the_eu/

They say, 'Through the EEA-Agreement Norway and the other EEA EFTA States have taken on the obligation to implement all EU legislation relevant to the functioning of the internal market.'

An internal market and free trade is what the UK voted and Maggie signed up for.

Norway is also a member of NATO, so what this country has created seems perfect to me. When Cameron sweeps in, let's have an 'in-or-out' vote and then the issue will be settled for years and certainly lifts the EU debate as a Conservative burden.

Verity

Carroll Barry Walsh: "...has not had its accounts signed off for however many years ...".

Thirteen. Thirteen years. Meaning, back in the last century.

Verity

David Lindsay, above, said it all.

(Sorry a tous about two posts in a row, but it is impossible to switch back and forth with the new, controlling, intentionally unpleasant format.)

TrevorsDen

"I will vote for a party that will." --- like who? You are the biggest fool in Christendom.
Are you a member of a political party? If not you are clearly not putting your money where your mouth is. If you have an opinion then campaign to see that opinion pursued in he party you support. Then you would realise how unimportant the EU is to the electorate.

Do you support Labour? Do you? If not then clearly not voting tory solely on the issue of the EU will only make a pro EU Labour victory more likely.

As someone else has said there is plenty of options short of a meaningless referendum to ensure British views are heard and EU interference minimised.

But anyway if the treaty comes into force all the referendums in the world cannot change it. To go into an election saying that a fully ratified treaty would be reneged on (how?) would give the opposition carte blanch to say we would be ruined and isolated.

And how certain is it that a referendum would say NO. There is none.

Cameron is totally right to keep his powder dry. I do not like the EU not one bit. But lets be clear - I no which side my bread is buttered and I want Brown and his cohorts out - first last and foremost.

Derek

I find the belief shown by some in this thread in the independence of the Conservative Party on this issue to be touching, but misplaced. Just as a three-line whip is applied by a party when voting in the House on important matters, it seems clear to me that a three-line whip is in force on all three of the main parties so as to deny us a referendum on this "Enabling Act", posing as a treaty. This can be inferred from the bad faith of the politicians and also explains it.

Whom might be imposing the whip is a question which present English libel laws will not permit to be investigated.

2trueblue

???Mandy came back to keep the Labour party together and thus prevent an early election, which would have paved the way for the Tories (if they won) to give the public their promised referendum. The Irish voted against the Lisbon treaty, and were told to vote again. The French and the Danes voted against the Constitution. What sort of union is this?
If Cameron can not find the solution to convey to us what he intends to do then we may have to convey our reply to him when we vote.

Verity's Downstairs Bathroom

Trevors Den comes up with the unusual observation that he wants Cameron to "keep his powder dry". Oh how we have laughed over this phrase these past two years!

Dave's powder is so dry that he would barely notice it if he sniffed it up his nose. We are talking dry here. Pulverised into fine particles. Atomised, really.

I don't know of what value this is. Don't you have dry powder so you can fire shots? And wouldn't the Heir to Blair disapprove of guns?

Hysteria

what trevorsden said - priority is to defeat socialism - then build our nation back up and deal with europe later.

Pete-s

Talk sense; if by the time the cons are in the Treaty is ratified it is a dine deal. You CANNOT undo the Treaty, it is self amending. The only referendum you could possibly have is IN or OUT. The only way forward is to stay in for the foreseeable future and screw the system like the French do. If it gets intolerable get out.

David

Shouldn't the question be; why hasn't Gordon Brown offered a referendum, it was after all in his manifesto.

John Hall

A referendum was promised.
It has not been given us.
If it's not forthcoming it will entirely invalidate Cameron's chances of setting himself out as a man of integrity to the electorate.
This will mince the Tory voters as well as floating voters even with the current disillusion with Brown's administration. Wrong, wrong, wrong.
One of Cameron's major trumps to play was that he wasn't party to the Augean morass that is associated with the government. If he loses that distinction some of his natural voters will go for UKIP and even more will stay at home with the BNP picking up the working class Tory vote.

Jock

David Lindsay - A bit tricky for Cameron to promise not to ratify something already ratified by Labour through Parliament

Rush-is-Right

Paul Waugh quotes the relevent text in his blog here.

And here's the quote...

"Today, I will give this cast-iron guarantee: If I become PM, a Conservative government will hold a referendum on any EU treaty that emerges from these negotiations."

As PW says, not a lot of wriggle-room there.

Fergus Pickering

David Lindsay, no one will ask Cameron to ratify the treaty. The British Prime Minister has ratified it already, alas.

Mark Cannon

Some of the comments above seem to ignore the fact that the UK has ratified the Lisbon Treaty. If the other EU countries have done so before the next general election then it will be in force. So Cameron cannot refuse to ratify it. Nor is it obvious what purpose would be served by holding a referendum after the event: the UK would still be bound by it. This point would be made against the Tories if they promised a referendum simply on the Lisbon Treaty: it's a waste of time and money and shows you are Euro-fanatics out of touch with mainstream opinion (see some of the comments above).
What the Tories need if Lisbon is fully ratified and in force when they come to power is a policy of re-negotiation, perhaps backed by a popular vote in a referendum. But the our "partners" may well decline to engage in meaningful talks.

So I am sure that Cameron would much prefer it if we could have a referendum before the Lisbon Treaty comes into force. Those who suggest otherwise are just being silly.

Victor Southern

As David Lindsay knows very well the decision to ratify the Lisbon Treaty is not in his power. It has already been ratified by Brown.

Cameron can only use his power as Prime Minister to secure better deals for the UK when negotiating with other EU leaders. That would be a change as Blair and Brown have only ever tried to secure whatever was best for them personally.

When Blair interrupted his farewell world tour to rush and sign the treaty in principle he had already sold us out. Now he expects his reward.

Brown will get his, when he is shoved out, by being the big wheel in yet another international body, the G20.

So, we can never be rid of these quislings.

Donna

Fatbloke, Whitney, MaxSceptic and all the others down the list who will be 'shocked and disgusted' if David Cameron doesn't hold a referendum on Lisbon EVEN IF it's already been ratified, what leader in their right mind WOULD?

If it has been ratified, then the British public's view will make not a jot of difference. It would be the classic case of shutting the door after the horse has bolted - and would leave the vast majority of the country, for whom the EU question isn't exactly high on the agenda, wondering whether Cameron had lost his marbles.

I mean, what's the question going to say?: "The Lisbon Treaty has already been ratified by the outgoing Labour Government so we're in this Federalised EU now, and there ain't an awful lot we can do about that besides attempting to grapple some powers back again, but, just out of curiosity, had it NOT already been ratified, would you have wanted us to sign that peice of paper? Yes or no?"

John

What Cameron and Osborne will have to address is the level of EU tax that the UK pays. Until recently we paid a fixed Sterling amount, but McMental had one of his brainwaves and decided that next year we would pay in Euros.

Since then the Pound Sterling to Euro exchange rate devalued by 40 pct, so in 2009 we pay GBP 48 bn and in 2010 we pay GBP 68 bn! One thing that puzzles me is that the EU seems to think that our finances are OK, but if we become integrated in the EU fully, I believe that if the EU had to carry our burden as a banker of last resort this might finish off the EU as well. The off balance sheet items such as PPP and PFI could well be as toxic as CDOs in the financial sector, and we have not seen the end of the financial crisis either.

jon

Cameron should withhold our payments until we negotiate lower membership fees to the EU. It would help our budget deficit as well.

Peggy.Day

They have said, "They will not let it rest there",if the treaty is ratified, if they take office.
They will have been studying their options for months if not years,for every scenario.They have not just picked this issue up and are now rushing around trying to say something 'popular'.They KNOW the score.
Maybe we should just allow Hague to do his job.We have no power to alter anything as things stand.
It then comes down to character, is Hague a 'weak' Tory?, is Hague a liar,a naive fool? Love her or hate her Maggie was his idol back in the day and ,like her,Hague WILL NOT sell Britain down the river.
Brown,on the other hand has lied, spun and slinked of to sign the treaty,knowing we WANT a referendum, another promise made by Labour broken.So do we play Labour's game?..
Do not trust the Tories, do not trust Cameron, do not trust Hague,do not trust Osborne?Do not trust your neighbour,friend.
Just trust us,we are the Labour party,we have made this country great,fair,a beacon in the world.We know what is best for you. YEAH RIGHT!!
Past actions and behaviour are a good yard stick when deciding who to trust.
I have complete faith in Hague, Cameron AND Osborne. Why? Because they have faith in themselves,they trust each other and they KNOW this treaty is NOT democratic.
They have absolutely NOTHING to gain by denying the British people their say,I also believe that they are NOT aiming for just a
single term in office.The choice is entirely ours,true,so...as we stand now..do we give Hague a shot, or do we just accept the status quo? I think we should have a say.
Just because we do not know the in's and out's of Hague's plans,DOES NOT mean he has none.It could well be a 'TECHNICALITY'
in the wording of this treaty that will get us our vote on it,so being quiet IS the BEST way forward.
Yes still have your doubts as to whether Hague will do anything, however, my money is on him at LEAST trying EVERYTHING he can.
It may even boil down to a referendum on
whether we remain in the EU...AND the EU are much more likely to give us a vote on some shitty little treaty, than have us PULL OUT altogether....too much money goes their way from us for them to be pig headed.
It is when you look at it a WIN, WIN situation for Hague.

seb

"The euro and the Europeans have rescued us from our own appalling decade of economic mismanagement." There you have it. Straight from one of the horse's orifices. Michael O'Leary, head of Ryanair, telling us why the Irish are likely to vote in favour of the Lisbon Capitulation. They're tossers and they can't manage at all unless France and Germany are propping up what passes for an economy in the Republic.

One has to conclude, given the Tory leadership's view that we "don't mention the Treaty!", that this is not only O'Leary's view but that of most of the political classes in the UK. The Czechs and the Poles might, just, succeed in delaying or derailing the Treaty's rubber-stamping and Blair might, of course, fail to become EuroKanzler. But if Cameron does not give this largely anti-EU nation the referendum it has been promised, he'll deservedly lose votes to UKIP at the same rate that Brown is losing votes to the nazis.

Vulture

In an ungaurded moment during the European election campaign in June, Dave told a questioner who asked what the Tories would do if Lisbon were ratified by all EU states; "We'll have to live with it". So we know what ther Tories will ( or rather won't) do about it. Their silence or rather evasiveness on the issue is simply an effort to keep the huge number of Tories who might vote UKIP in the fold.

I don't agree with Coffee Housers who think Europe is a minor issue. If Lisbon comes into force and is not overturned Westminster really will be reduced to a County Council within the national EU federation, and who is in No.10
will matter very little.

But to look on the bright side, undemocratic federations without popular support tend not to last for long. As we see in Afghanistan, people are still willing to fight and die for their country. (Amazing, considering what a cesspit Bruin's Britain has become). Not even Ken Clarke or Eddie Izzard, I think, would lay down their lives for the EU.

Ben Elford

Like Trevorsden and many others, I desperately want to get rid of this present incompetent and controlling government. However ...

If the Conservative position is that they will decide whether or not to honour their commitment to give a referendum on the Lisbon constitution depending on the outcome of a vote in Ireland, I would find it hard to vote for them ever again.

We are being drawn further into the grip of an antidemocratic and corrupt megastate. Who will defend our liberties?

Michael

But a ratified treaty is still only a written agreement between countries. If we, a sovereign nation, state that we wish to abrogate it, then there is absolutely nothing to stop us. And please don't go on about trade sanctions being put in place, they need our markets more than we need them.

JONNY

So we're back to shooting ourselves in the foot over Europe. Nice timing.
The stale old tried routine that worked so well for us in 2001 and 2005.
Why if we try hard enough we might even throw the Jolly Election. Then we can all go merrily into hibernation for a few more years and kick out Cameron.

Nice work boys.

Publius

I am one of those who voted yes to a Common Market in the 70s. At the time those who were opposed claimed that the real plan was to build a Superstate or centralised federal state of some sort. These claims were dismissed as the ravings of a lunatic faction. Now, looking back, I see that the supposed lunatic faction were right, and I was wrong. My only defence is that I was young, and I was taken in by the media.

Some people have said that we should accept the Lisbon treaty and focus on more important things. This of course pre-judges the question by assuming that Lisbon isn't really that important.

But my question to those people is this: by "focusing on more important things", do they mean that we must focus on whatever "competency" the EU deigns to allow us, and just accept that what the EU does not deign to allow us is a lost fight? You see, since Lisbon will be self-amending by a majority vote, quite what we are allowed to do by the EU and its legal-activist arm the ECJ (which, don't forget, has a remit to promote every closer union) will likely become ever smaller. The demise of the City? Just accept that the EU has decided on that and we'd better be "realistic" and stick to some other "competency"? An order to open our borders, as the French are already agitating for? Just go along with it if we are ordered to do so? Social legislation? Tax legislation? These too are being centralised, and subject to majority voting.

Quite where are we supposed to draw the line, if not now and here? Because we are signing away our ability to draw that line.

Jane

I think that David Cameron will need to be careful over this issue. I like many are disaffected labour party supporters studying the conservative party. Many of us warm to David Cameron and George Osborne. I have been appalled at William Hague this week. I read David Miliband's speech and everything he said can be substantiated. Yes, I do not believe that Eric Pickles is anti semetic but he used rather loose language regarding the Waffenden-SS when a clear statement of abhorrence would have been better. I also acknowledge that Michal Kaminski is trying to rid himself of many of his earlier anti homosexual, semetic etc comment which is documented and on video tape. I also think David Cameron made a mistake in aligning Tory MEPs with this group. Why do I see the hand of William Hague behind this?

If the Lisbon Treaty is ratified then an EU President will be chosen. I find it dreadful that a British political party would prefer to have anyone other than Tony Blair -in the event of him being successful. The Conservative Party show their nastiness in this repect and also their unfitness to represent everything that is good about Britain in the world. The German Chancellor has also made her views clear. I want whatever government in power to have relationships with our European neighbours whom we need. In my opinion we can no longer look at the transatlantic relationship as being somehow more important. I do not think the US shares this view.

William Hague has upset me this week. He may have made Tory core voters very happy as he of course did when he campaigned on saving the £. However, one does not win elections by appealing to ones core vote. I am surprised that Tory supporters have not grasped this by now. Oh yes - do threaten to vote UKIP. We will lose the City of London and all the FTSE companies. What sort of country would we be then?

Derek

Once we have a government in place in Great Britain which reflects the will of the people on the issue of the "Lisbon Treaty", that administration should follow the example of the present Chinese regime with regard to the treaties negotiated by the Chinese imperial government with foreign occupying powers in the 19th century and designate it as an "unequal treaty".

Incidentally, it is worth keeping in mind, when considering the names for this legislation which Brussels Centre has come up with, that the official name of the most notorious Enabling Act in the last century was the "Law for Removing the Distress of the People and the Reich".

Quite.

Jim H

I wouldn't worry about it, we have a good ten years of financial crisis ahead of us, that will destroy the EU eventually.
Having said that I'd like to have a referendum.

Chumping at the bits

The Irish are not stupid - they are making sure they don't have to vote a third time.

Swiss Bob

The Government has no right to ratify without a referendum, the supremacy of Parliament does not trump the consititutional rights of the people.

Not that that's bothered the present bunch of criminals in power.

Victor Southern

Jane

Do not try to fool us. You would have criticised William Hague if he had found the cure for cancer and you would have supported David Miliband even if he gone around the world insulting the leaders of other countries.

As he did.

So please do not come pathetically on here pretending to be a Labourite who is somewhat disaffected.

crowbait

Since Mr Heath and friends conned the electorate, successive governments have repeatedly lied about Europe.We have now reached the stage where other nations decide our fate and some among us say we have no choice in the matter so lay back and do not think of England.Without resolute and prompt action by Mr Cameron then further Westminster elections will be reduced to the level of that for the local rural district council.The orders will come from the unelected socialists in Brussels and the British government will do as it is told.The IMF will decide what action will be taken re the financial situation.So it seems that it really does not make any difference whether Mr Brown goes ,or stays.
Of course our politicians will continue to thrive on their soon to be increased salaries and gold plated pensions not to mention their expences.Perhaps we should not mention the expenses.

David Ossitt

Victor Southern

"Jane

Do not try to fool us"

Well spotted Victor; "Jane" could well be one of David Miliband's little helpers.

David Lindsay

The Irish never have got the hang of this independence lark. Mass provision of troops for the British Army as if nothing had happened. No passport controls at the docks. A built-in one-for-one arrangement with sterling until into the 1980s. So many of them living over here that they have always been able to vote and stand in our elections. And much more besides.

They only went in because we were going to, so economically they couldn't not. They were only able to keep out of NATO because they knew that, with our not insignificantly Irish Armed Forces as much as anything else, we were always going to protect them anyway. They joined the Euro because, in the early Blair years, they thought that we might.

The spectator sees more of the game. The Irish can see how signed up to European federalism we are. And that is why they are. Only more honestly. They certainly wouldn't mind Tony Blair as President anything like as much as people in his own country would. Sinn Féin has always called Dublin governments "British governments by proxy". Well, that was clearly what people wanted. With the EU now Britain's government, having it headed by an Englishman, Scotsman, or whatever it is that he is ("Simply British"?) is anything but an argument against it to them. It is more like the natural order.

Those who feel strongly about a distinctive, and so far as possible self-governing, Ireland are like those who feel strongly about a Catholic Ireland, or a Gaelic Ireland, or an Ireland which cherishes the lore of Irish Nationalism: the only such Ireland now is within the United Kingdom, where these things are actively encouraged economically, socially, culturally and politically. In the Republic, they are being systematically suppressed. With, it transpires today, enthusiastic public support.

Archie

MaxSceptic: I'm doing better than that, I'm voting for a party that has promised complete withdrawal. So is everyone else I know!

Archie

TrevorsDen: How? Well, witholding the £50 mill a week or whatever disgusting amount it is, would focus their minds I suggest!