There is peace tonight but if Cameron's Europe plan doesn't succeed, the Tory Europe wars will return

DavidDP

"But it wants the mechanisms that Cameron announced to prevent any further erosion of sovereignty to work."

What an odd comment.

Bob H

So the man's a proven liar then, just like the others.

Its the BBC continuum at work.
Blair
Brown
Cameron.
BBC

They all have no integrity and Cameron has shown that he is cast in the same mould as the other two.

Damn you! Why should we trust you on anything now. Even before you take office you renage on what is the most important issue of this nation, Sovereignty.

Cameron's dissembling on this issue is based on the fact that there is no point in a referendum because it has been ratified. However when he gave that CAST IRON guarantee, he just said he would hold a referendum on any treaty emerging from the negotiations.

He never qualified it, therefore he could make that referendum any sort he likes, as long as it is on the treaty.

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.

He was desperate for a loophole so he could back out of his promise. His word is now of no worth.
Being ratified is irrelevant against the issue of basic honesty. The results of a referendum would give the Tories true power to DEMAND of the European Union what WE want, not just squirm and plead like every other time.

Cast iron? Blancmange more like.
So now we know, it'll be more of the same under the Tories.

Nick

Cameron has lied. He's lost at least two tory votes and that's from a pro European.

1. Hold a referenda as promised.
2. Under UK law the treaty is ultra vires.
3. EU gets the laws it wants. We can't undo the treaty
4. The UK doesn't get EU laws if the referenda says no.

Very simple in spite of what politicians say.

diane C - London

Cameron's mistake was not explaining clearly that his promise of a referendum was wholly conditional on his party being elected before the Treaty was ratified. As it looked more and more likely that this was not going to happen, he should have kept reminding us that the Labour Party was to blame, that a referendum would be a waste of time and money, but the the Conservatives would ensure no more power would drain away from the UK - as he announced yesterday. He should have shown fury at Gordon Brown's dishonesty. Now he is just another politician who has not kept his promise and even worse, is allowing Labour to snipe at his "cast iron promise". It is the worse of all worlds for him ....

strapworld

"there could be trouble ahead".

but while there's moonlight, love and romance........

Trouble ahead sounds like those Labour MP's who are always going to challenge Brown, but never do.

These cowards should either Put UP of SHUT up! They insult our intelligence.

Cameron is not the bogey man in all this. BROWN and BLAIR are both guilty of treason, aided and abetted by all the quislings sitting as Labour and Liberal Democratic MP's with one or two honourable exceptions.

I think the reaction of the French minister, reported in the newspapers this morning, says it all. They will give Cameron a very hard time. That will show us all just what kind of iron he is made from.

I also believe, should he be elected prime minister, that he will call an IN or OUT referendum much earlier than he suggested yesterday. As soon as he finds that he is up against a stone wall when 'negotiating' and he is getting nowhere (and people will want results) he will play the In or Out card and then watch the EU panic!

Cameron played it poorly yesterday. he has had months to think about his policy, post Lisbon, and it appeared to me it was cobbled together very quickly indeed.

My message to the tory euro sceptics is to speak up today as loud as you can, create mayhem and within a day or two Cameron will announce a new approach. He is a weak man get at him!

Neil Turner

The French comments last night show just how much chance DCs plans have of success.

Those disaffected Tory voters such as my wife and I now look to UKIP for a clear and credible lead on this issue ie how to so threaten the Tories chances of winning power that DC will have to change his position.

I have waited 12 years for the chance to throw Labour out, but am deadly serious and will not compromise over the EU.

I want out

Alan Phillips

I really don't get people who say that he's sold out. The total opt-out referendum is still available, should Europe refuse to play ball. Cameron projected an image of going in peace to the EU, why would anybody start the talks of getting back something its people never had a vote on, with anything other than a initially friendly open gambit?

I get people are disappointed with not getting the referendum on Lisbon, but as Dave said "it's now law!" the mechanism to do so has gone. In or out hasn't disappeared, it's just not top of the agenda, nor even on the first page, but then it never was...

seb

Perhaps there exists a secret political party that includes Blair, Cameron and all of the Business Knows Best, Ban Everything, micro-manager EU fetishists. Perhaps the people who turn up on comment sites saying that it's now pointless voting in the UK are right.

But I'm an optimist. I'm hoping that Cameron will see the opportunities that exist for securing his party the 2014 election too. Other than some genuine economic growth, nothing would please the non-retarded members of the electorate more than seeing the government stand up for this nation's sovereignty.

It this does not happen, we can only assume that DC and his team are secret members of that other party, the Post-Democratic Party that EU fetishists like Mandelson hint at when they scoff at critics of the EU's democratic deficit.

John Hall

Logical incoherence from Call Me Dave. I'm not going to challenge Lisbon as it's now law BUT I shall challenge and contain the self-amending passerelle clauses contained within it. Either do it properly and we can believe in you or don't bother. The figleaf is too small and the electorate will see through this regardless of however much rah-rah work is done from Central Office. Repatriation of powers by asking for them. Yeah, like that's really worked in the past, hasn't it?

Vulture

I was at a debate last night with a former Tory front-bencher (still an MP but no names, no packdrill) who despises Cameron. His reading is rather different from yours, James. Viz. That Cameron is a spineless, unprincipled, policy-light berk who will say and do anything to get elected but doesn't know what the hell he'll do when he gets there. He's a cushion bearing the arse-prints of the last person to sit on him.

What this country needs is a leader, but (outside the Army) there's none in sight.

Publius

@Nick
For God's sake, the singular of "referenda" is "referendum".

One referendum
Two referenda (or referendums)

David Bouvier

I am getting really tired of the spurious analysis of the "cast iron" speech.

Any statement has any number of implicit assumptions built into it. Lawyers have learnt the hard way that words do not have "plain meaning" - they require context and interpretation.

Headbangers obssessed with intra-party warfare are just doing Labour's work.

I do wish they would give it up. Cameron and Hague have made it very clear for a very long time that there would be no post-ratification referendum. It is absurd that opposition policy remains unchanged is the main story rather than Brown and Blair actual breach of manifesto promise.

oldtimer

There is much heat and little light in the charges that Cameron has lied over a referendum on Lisbon. His actual words in his letter to the Sun were (courtesy of Iain Dale blog today):
"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. No treaty should be ratified without consulting the British people in a referendum."

Cameron is certainly not a "liar" as alleged in an earlier post. By all means disagree with the course he has said he will take, but to do so on the basis that he is a "liar" is unfounded.

I happen to agree that if he gets nowhere with repatriation of powers from the EU then he will face great difficulties from his own side. But I also believe it is worth making the attempt and the reasons he states for his approach are, in my opinion, sensible.

Where I disagree with his approach is what happens in the event he is stiffed by the other EU states. Then I believe the case for an in/out referendum would be overwhelming. By then the arguments would be clearer to the voters at large (future legal realities vs present treaty abstractions) and the chances of getting a more informed referendum would be much greater. I also believe that the chances of achieving a majority to leave the EU would then be much greater than they are today. Today the UK is in a weaker position than it has been since the start of WW2 (I was around at the time). The priority must be to restore the nation`s finances. The best chance of doing that requires the defeat of Brown and co and a Conservative government.

Publius

Leaving aside for a moment the question of whether we should be in the EU at all, just on the Lisbon Treaty, the central objections (not the only ones) that I have are:

a) the self-amending "ratchet"
b) the question of the primacy of UK law over EU law.

I want to see, precisely and in terms, how Mr Cameron intends to ensure that the ratchet is prevented in the case of the UK (the rest of them can do what they want), and how he is going to ensure the primacy of UK law.

On the wider question, my position remains as it has always been. The EU, as a superstate, will never survive. It will be dragged down by its own internal contradictions, and by its elevation of abstract theory over practice and human nature.

Peter

In would like to see a post from a constitutional lawyer to offer his learned opinion as to our position. Clearly most of the posters think they know but they cannot all be right as there are numerous opinons.

All this stupid lambasting of cameron is a waste of time IF the ratification of the treaty cannot legally be undone. We have too many other serious problems which a new government has to solve without the time and money spent on a referendum on the treaty.

However a referendum on whether we want to remain a member of the EU is a quite different matter and I am coming round to the idea that that is what we should have.

Cameron's promises might appease the scptics but the words are worthless because there will be no need for new treaties in the future. The enactment of Lisbon has effectively set in place the means by which new laws can be added to the EU statutes without further consultation.

But let's hear from someone who actually knows the law fully understands the ramifications.

Chris

Well, its into the next day and the peace didn't last long did it.

Publius

Worth a look:

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/centreright/2009/11/the-triumph-of-euroscepticism.html

JONNY

Sad to say (or rather relieved)
there's only one seat UKIP might possibly win.
And the way Bercow's shaping up, that would be a pity.

So it doesn't look as if the Out of Europe Altogether brigade will get much of a showing in the next parliament.
David's their best and only hope.
Small beer's better than no beer.

Alan Douglas

How to manipulate public opinion

1. Wait for a big Tory announcement
2. Put up lots of comments claiming to be from Tories disgusted with it.
3. Perhaps fool some proper Tories into agreeing and adding negative comment.
4. Wait for the MSM to pick up and widely spread the "fact" that Tory grassroots HATE the Tory announcement AND D Cameron.
5. Repair to the Spinner's Arms for a well-earned drink or two.

Alan Douglas

Verity

David P - I just turned on my computer and come to this piece and you took the words right out of my keyboard.

Peter From Maidstone

I've been wondering how much a referendum would cost to arrange. Not necessarily one that was absolutely as guaranteed democratically honest as a GE, but one that was honest enough to show the will of the people. I wonder how much that would cost and if a rich sponsor would pay for it if it became necessary.

Frank P

Mark the Man reprises his piece from May 24th 2005 and his prescience outclasses anything we conservative dissidents evocate in our febrile rants.

http://www.steynonline.com/content/view/2607/30/

Verity

Forgive the ghastly grammar, above. I had meant to write it in the past perfect.

Publius

As Cameron hinted at yesterday, the proof of the Lisbon pudding will not be in its in impenetrable tricky text, but in the way it is shoved up the arses of the unwilling electorates.

The Eurocrats, armed with the arrogance of their supposed victory, will overreach themselves.

Frank P

Verity

Thought it was your illiterate doppelgänger for a minute, particularly as you agreed with DavidDP. Your are forgiven both for lapses; have another coffee and on with the motley.:-)

Cogito Ergosum

@Peter from Maidstone 1.48pm

As I have said previously, you don't need a referendum to tell you the public mood. A professionally conducted opinion poll will do. In response to other comment, that poll can be as honest as the person paying for it wishes it to be.

Lord A and his ilk can pay for such things out of their beer money.

Tony Gee

It is understandable how this arrogance amongst the two main parties and their MPs has addled their judgement. Historically the skewed and undemocratic FPTP voting system only requires the winning of 70 marginal seats for an overall majority. Maybe, just maybe the electorate has had enough and will vote sufficiently for UKIP and BNP to win seats and or create a hung parliament.

Derek

Regardless of what constitutional lawyers may say one way or the other, so long as we have armed forces loyal to the concept of the Queen in Parliament and we have some cash, we can assert and defend our sovereignty in the face of a score of Lisbon Treaties. Whether we do or not is another matter. It must therefore be a priority to ensure that the Charlemagne Division in Brussels does not implement some cunning plan to merge by stealth our armed forces with their own. Vulture may be right and a leader from the as yet un-disaffected army more urgently required than is thought. In the English tradition, revolution is always understood as the return to the status quo ante.

Amadeus Plonquer

Derek - 'some cunning plan to merge by stealth our armed forces with their own.'

In practice this obviously wouldn't work. If a pan-European army was ever given an order to 'attack' the English would hold their thin red line, the Scots would charge down the hill and the Welsh would repel the zulus. The Italians, however, would only find the reverse gear on their tanks and at the first sound of gunfire the French would throw down their weapons and pass out the weinerschnitzel. Not exactly the Charge of the Light Brigade, what?