Could Gordon torpedo the Tory EU lifeboat?
July 30th, 2007
Where would Cameron stand if the EU referendum issue was closed down?
One of the most brilliant moves by Tony Blair was his amazing U-turn in April 2004 on having a referendum on the EU constitution. For in one short announcement he completely undermined the Tory campaign for the Euro Election seven weeks hence. The demand for a referendum had been Michael Howard’s device of uniting the Tories on the contentious EU issue.
At a stroke Blair had taken away Howard’s protection and this in many ways helped open the UKIP split. The only problem for Blair was the referendum commitment but, lucky beggar that he was, the French turned it down in May 2005 effectively killing the new constitution stone dead.
-
Now we don’t have an constitution but a proposed new treaty which provides the same unifying policy for Cameron that Howard thought he was enjoying.
The polls are on the Tories side on this one. YouGov reported on Friday a 58%-17% split on supporting the referendum idea. Cameron will, no doubt, use this as his major theme as he seeks to re-establish his authority at the Tory conference in October.
Unlike most other Tory policies which Gordon Brown has stolen - including the border police last week - the new PM has continued to oppose a referendum and dealt with Cameron’s points on this at the last PMQs by saying “I see we are back to the old agenda”.
But what if Brown himself decided to change his mind and to oppose the Treaty - would that torpedo Tories?
Bruce Anderson raises this possibility in today’s Independent “…Were he to say that, after examining the constitutional text in detail, he finds himself unable to recommend it to Parliament, it would be hard to know whose teeth were grinding the loudest: Nicolas Sarkozy’s, Angela Merkel’s, or the Tory party’s. Shooting the European fox would be much easier than banning fox-hunting. It would also please Rupert Murdoch and Paul Dacre, the editor of the Daily Mail.”
If Tony got away with it three years ago what’s to say that Gordon is not going to follow suit?
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Ok - but does he support the treaty or oppose it in the referendum ?
Given the scorn that Labour have tried to pour on the tories and Brown’s refusal at the despatch box in PMQ’s to hold one - I doubt it.
Brown is in danger of becaming a serial Flip- FLopper if he embarks on any more of these moves. It does not say much for him if he is only concerned with shooting the “Tory Fox”. Brown is starting to be portrayed as a man who acts in party political interest not National Interest.
Brown has a record of deseption and he is begining to border on a man who changes his mind to often on areas of policy Labour claimed he was driving for years. Brown is rapidly in danger of not just conceeding the political agenda in it;s entirity to the tories but Brown making himself his first victim!!!
All Brown has to do is promise to consider the matter, and await the referenda in other countries to kill the new treaty dead!
2. Brown may have been instrumental in positioning Labour pre 1997 toward Tory positions. It does not say much for the man or the party if they are that intellectually berift of ideas that they have to take on the oppositions agenda because Labour’s agenda has failed and is out of touch.
I think this is overblown. Firstly the 2004 pledge what did it achieve. Well it probably stropped MH having a very good Euro Elections. Could it have substantially impacted the the General Election Uncertain.
Second as 1 points out unlike TB, there is practically no chance he’ll get lucky and have someone else torpedo it first. So he’ll have to campaign for it, and even if he went next Spring that would be all the Press would be asking him abut. more so if he went later as Referendum would precede the General Election. Basically “Lucky” Tony got away with it big time. There is unlikely to be so much luck for GB
Third unlike MH, Cameron has been careful not to be seen as a one trick pony. He has called for one but has been careful not to be seen to be publicly obsessed about it. He has learn’t from MH’s experience and is no doubt ready for such an eventuality I think. After last time how can they not
5. Your analysis is right - I agree. Political tricks only usually work once like this and i think the Tories have been strategically srewd in keeping this on the back burner and pressing on more bread and butter issues in the interegnum between the old constituation been defeated in european states and the new document being proposed and endorsed by Brown / Blair or if you like the Labour government.
I was interested to note the Stewart & Field interventions on the issue. They are something unique in the Labour party at this time: they put the UK’s national interest ahead of the Labour parties interest.
In terms of Brown / Bush in the golfing buggy, i am astoninshed at the BBC’s political correspondent not picking up on the message coming from bush there. I am becoming very dissapointed with Nick Robinson, he is becoming Brown’s Lap Dog.
Robinson could have said at the very least that some uncharitable people may assume that Bush has demonstrated that he is still the one in the driving seat after Brown has inflamed american opinion through the appointment of Lord Malhoc Brown and the speech by Douglas Alexander. Labour cannot have it both ways - It was either a cock -up (Alexander speech) or intentional. If it was intentional then Bush has just got his reprisal in and said “i’m the boss”.
Brown daren’t, he’d lose his party as the likelihood is that, this time, a referendum would actually take place.
Martin Day @ 7 — “I’m the boss” or “I’m the chauffeur”?
Intriguing.
This is the one issue which could really and easily swing the electoral tide back towards the Tories. It gets the tabloids rooting for Cameron, and it unites the Tory party (apart from Blue Moon); and, as you say, the issue chimes with public opinion.
Also it gives the Tories the moral high ground; Labour know they are reneging on a solemn manifesto promise here. And lefties hate being obviously in the wrong.
Moreover, every single Labour MP is gonna be asked about this, ad nauseam, until the next election. You promised us a vote, where is it? I believe it was our very own Nick Palmer who said in his last manifesto: ‘I believe in democracy, therefore I support a referendum on the European Constitution’.
This is a very difficult position to resile from, to put it mildly. What, you’ve gone off democracy? Everyone agrees this is basically the Constitution in drag. So the argument that it is hugely different is out.
Some say it has amendments tacked on to make it just different enough, but Tony Blair himself said: ‘what you can’t have is a situation where you bring back the old Constitution with a few amendments, and say have another go’. Thanks Tony.
So that argument is shot, too.
What can Brown do? He can try and force it through. Very nasty. This means guaranteed electoral damage (especially in the euros), and some splits in his party; it also pits big unions against him. And all the papers, practically. Moreover if he insists on pressing on, someone will organise a private referendum - which he will then have to ignore. It gets worse and worse.
So he has to do something. He could call an early GE and ask for a mandate to sign without a vote. But the fact he won’t give a vote will trouble his campaign in itself. And of course he risks defeat.
He could oppose the Treaty before it is signed. Possible but not very likely. He’s already said he wants it. But maybe he can find a reason to suddenly dislike it.
IMHO his best bet is just to look statesmanlike, call a vote, deal with the backlash. Then he shoot the Tory fox, reap the rewards of tabloid praise, then swiftly call a GE in say 2008 or early 2009, which he will win. After that he can have the vote, lose it, and not give much of a fig because he’ll be in the early stages of his next government.
Bish bosh. Job done.
9. “I’m the boss!!!!”
The EU issue now is like Devolution was in the 1970s/80s - it is rapidly becoming an important issue and divides political parties. The people want a referendum whether they be pro or against.
Anyone have any thoughts about how serious support for a referendum is likely to be in Britain?
Presumably the Murdoch papers will go after it in a big way, but that’s only really an issue if what they’re demanding actually resonates with the public. (If Murdoch decides to try to destroy Gordon over it and attacks him on whatever other issue he looks weak on, that’s a bit different, obviously.)
When you ask the public if they support a referendum on something, they always seem to say yes; Have there been any polls in which the public have ever said no to a referendum on anything?
When evaluating this kind of thing, it might be useful to have a pollster ask a bunch of questions on entirely made-up questions to get some kind of baseline for evaluating these polls;
- “Should the government hold a referendum on the Treaty of Upper Bremen?”
- “Do you support military action to defend against the ongoing threat to British interests in Baloonga?”
- “Do you think Bob Dimblethorpe should resign over the Grumbleworth Affair?”
Re Mike’s upcoming Tory leader thread. My guesses:
Hague is the one Labour talks about so we can discount him; the one they really fear is David Davis who has seen off (or outlasted) several Labour big-hitters and arguably the Home Office itself.
The main reason I think most want a referendum is to vote against the treaty because they just want to oppose anything from Europe.
A no vote will be bad for Gordon so he wont do it. Tony only did it because he thought other countries will say no before it cam to us - this wont be the case this time as I think only one country (Ireland) will put it to the people.
Anyway how can anyone have a reasoned opinion on a document hundreds of pages long.
The other side of the coin is the disunited kingdom aspect of it.
SNP are very Pro-european indeed. In fact they want out of UK and in with EU.
This is another reason Brown has a problem because the SNP are going to be breathing down Brown’s neck certainly in votes if not seats. So the old Euro enthusistic and anti - enthusistic is distorted.
Why do the Tories need a “lifeboat”, Mike?
A 13% projected lead on 5th May slips to a 9% projected lead in late July post the succession.
It’s hardly “decks of the Titanic” is it?
As I said the other night, sad to see this generally impartial site jumping on the “kick the Tories”, “silly season special” bandwagon being fettled up ready to roll elsewhere.
14. Cameron is staying and that is that, i think the next leader of the LD is far nearer than the next leader of the tories.
The other problem for the LD’s is they are on the wrong side of this issue as well. I can never understand why the LD’s have in contrast to the U.S. want the UK to become the poodles of Brussels?
13. I’d say about 25% of the public are virulently eurosceptic, they ALL want a referendum because they think they will win.
Maybe 10% of the public is passionately pro-European. A few of them want a referendum just to get the argument over and done with, and to tackle eurosceptic “myths”. All credit to these noble souls. But most europhiles hate the idea of a vote because they know they will lose.
That leaves 60-70% of the people who don’t care much either way. On the whole, they tend to be moderately eurosceptic, but it hardly rules their thoughts.
I imagine this is a similar situation to that which obtained in Scotland prior to Devolution. A sizeable hardcore of seperatists, a large but moderate majority of autonomists, a much smaller hardcore of Unionists.
In the end Scots turned out in reasonable numbers to vote on their country’s future. The referendum was a good and worthwhile thing to do. Same goes for Britain and Europe.
Cameron’s fox may be shot by the Irish population rejecting the Constitution in their referendum - which is however an unlikely event.
If Brown were to concede a referendum, Sarkozy is unlikely to do a Chirac and let Brown of the hook by calling a French referendum to take place first. The referendum is likely to actually occur this time.
If the Constitution was rejected by the British electorate, what would happen next?
Eurosceptics would possibly start a campaign for partial withdrawal to associate status. Conservative Party policy might be at the vanguard of such a proposal. The issue is not just the Constitution. That is why Brown is desperate to draw a line over the EU if he can, and block the Referendum.
Cameron was not expected to put up such a fight. He was meant to be the next Blair, not the next Churchill.
18. Good point if anyone is really sinking tis the LD’s last Ge 22ish % of vote. Recent polls 16ish and sometimes lower % of vote.
The Tories are round about 33%, with one poll on 32% AND ONE ON 35% THAT SPRING TO MIND.
I’d like to see any evidence that this is an issue that is at all likely to be a political advantage for the opposition at ta General election.
Yes, people generally regard themselves as eurosceptic, and yes, people overwhelmingly say they want a referendum, but frankly, that question is almost irrelevant unless one considers how *much* they want it. Personally, If I had a choice of referendums, I’d put whether sheffield or West Ham were in the premier league above the latest EU treaty.
The more eurosceptic party has lost every election since 1979, with the exception of 1992, which was pretty much a wash in terms of euro-enthusiasm and the most euro-sceptic region of the country (SW) is the one that elects the most Liberal Democrats. It’s just not that big a factor in GEs.
13, 19. Most of the virulently Euro-sceptic ones are old-age pensioners, apparently. So they are dying off slowly, that’s the good news.
Brown would probably love to be able to hold a referendum on the treaty; it would relieve him of a millstone round his neck, in terms of tabloid media coverage. However, Punter is right in 5 - he can’t because he will then have to fight and probably loose a referendum, most likely this side of the election. That would be political suicide. It would sour relations with the rest of Europe just at the beginning of his time as pm, as France and the Netherlands would then have no reason not to have a referendum either.
Brown will basically have to keep a lid on demands for a referendum and bank on the fact that although tabloids will get aereated about the issue and public opinion is anti-Europe, it is not so anti that many people will vote Conservative at the election on this issue alone (who wouldn’t have done so anyway).
22. RE: most euro-sceptic region of the country (SW) - Could this be why the LD’s have plumeted in the polls losing over a third of their support?
You are confusing EU withdrawl 1983 & 1987 by the Labour party with sceptism. The Tories have been pro EU whilst sceptical or resistant to EU bearaucracy. For instance 1984 fontainbleure summit where thatcher negoitiated a rebate and Labour gave it back in recent years.
The SDP had a better idea of europe than the LD’s they were for the EU but like Lord Own sceptical on the momolithic budgets and centralism.
23. Interesting: Brown will basically have to keep a lid on demands for a referendum - we have gone from shooting the tory fox to Brown caving in to tory pressure!!!!
:lol: 
Going on past experience, those posters who advanced scenarios, speculation etc. as to what would happen when GB became PM,(particularly the Tory ones) the best place for all of this conjecture, is the shredder.
“Anyway how can anyone have a reasoned opinion on a document hundreds of pages long”
If no one can have a reasoned opinion on it because it’s so long, that’s a pretty good argument against introducing it.
Edmund in Tokyo a poll run earlier this year was running 83% to 17% against the Brown position if i remember rightly. That is the vast majority want a vote as promised on the constitution which is a treaty. the EU wide figure is not very different
http://www.openeurope.org.uk/media-centre/pressrelease.aspx?pressreleaseid=31
23. Sorry, but this is simply not true. Polls consistently show that euroscepticism is most common amongst young people - ! - and the very old. For instance when the euro was thought to be heading our way, polls showed that those age 18-30 were most against it. Along with those 65+.
It’s those in middle age, especially late middle age, who tend to be europhile. Look at all the europhiles in the Tory party -
Hurd, Howe, Heseltine - all 65+.
This makes sense historically. Europhilia, in the UK, was born during the post-war decline in Britain - the painful sense that our only hope was Europe. Add to this a dread of war in the immediate postwar generation and you have your explanation for middle age Federalism.
Since 1979 Britain has bounced back economically, so young British people see no reason to give up more sovereignty; moreover they take peace for granted.
Those hoping that euroscepticism will somehow wither on the vine are, therefore, simply wrong; if anything it is the unthinking europhilia of old Tories, Lib Dems, and some lefties, that is now old-fashioned.
This age breakdown is partly mirrored in places like Denmark and Holland, where it is the young who are more sceptical.
‘A 13% projected lead on 5th May slips to a 9% projected lead in late July post the succession.’
Where are you getting these figures from?
15 “Anyway how can anyone have a reasoned opinion on a document hundreds of pages long.
by LD lloyd’
Yes, I look at those MPs and wonder…………
5.Punter’s analysis is spot on. In fact I have noticed that there seems to be a real mood amongst those in favour of this new Treaty advocating a referendum to give it a real mandate from the voters.
Add to that the very public and honest commentary coming from other member nations clearing stating that it is basically the original constitution back in everything but name.
Labour and therefore Brown promised us a referendum on this issue to blunt the Conservatives previous attacks on the issue, as Mike points out Blair got extremely lucky when it all went pair shaped and a referendum was no longer needed.
Cameron would be better to maintain his present position and emphasis on the issue which *allows* Brown to keep digging a hole for himself rather than using it to bury Conservative leaders as has happened in the past.
I used to be pro EU but the unwanted policies they force us to accept have turned me into a sceptic. Many former Europhiles are following suit just like many devolutionists are turning into nationalists.
23.
“Only about 21% of young British people are Europhiles, while just under 30% are Eurosceptic.”
British Social Attitudes Survey, 2005.
It is in Brown’s interest to keep the Tories “banging on” about Europe. It makes them look old-fashioned and reminds the public about why they stopped voting Tory in 1997. Issues like these shore up and enthuse the Tory core vote and Cameron has only been forced back onto them because of discontent within his own party/support base.
32. *clearly*
O/T Brown looked very uncomfortable in that golf buggy with Bush and his whole body language screamed his discomfort at this type of photo call. What also did not help was the playback of his meeting with Sarkozy which was even more cringe worthy. The French President seemed comfortable and relaxed instinctively knowing that he needed to face the camera to allow for the expected official “meet and greet” photo to feature in the French press, it was ruined by Brown.
20 - “Cameron’s fox may be shot by the Irish population rejecting the Constitution in their referendum - which is however an unlikely event.”
It’s not such an unlikely event. But if it did happen then it would have no wider impact, the normal course of action in this circumstance would be to get the Irish to vote again and again until they finally give the right answer.
35. What about the Labour MP’s Field and Stewart, they are principly opposed to this new EU document. Somebody i think it was Redflump implied on the last page that these people were “Brown’s B*stards” (Please note i have put the puntution and the ’s’ on the end to make sure it does not look like a racial slur!).
35. An unintelligent analysis. Cameron just has to press this point every so often, to galvanise his troops. He won’t bang on about it - nor is he going to - not least because the Constitution crunch point is many months away - 2008, maybe even 2009.
For now, DC can safely leave the referendum issue to the tabloids, and - increasingly - the blogosphere. I note the Sun carries another pro-referendum story today. I make it the sixth in about seven days.
Every time it it mentioned Brown is characterised as the Man Who Broke His Solemn Promise. This will eventually start to hurt. Badly.
The political power of the referendum issue lies in the argument about consultation (remember Brown chuntering about this recently) and trust.
The EU treaty is important but it is not the pressure point. The Labour commitment to a referendum is an issue of trust. Labour claims that this new document is different and is not the old constitution is denied by almost every other government in Europe.
The claim that the ‘red lines’ allow opt outs has been challenged by lawyers, heads of government and the EU Commission.
So, as Gisela Stuart said yesterday, can we trust Brown in anything if he will not implement the manifesto promise to hold a referendum and tell the truth about the effect of the treaty.
Quite separately there is a compelling argument that a constitution that redistributes the democratic power to new bodies must have the consent of the people wether you are for or against it. And many Europhiles seem to be taking the honourable approach and demanding a referendum too.
Good sense really, as without a referendum the people might feel really peeeved and when a crisis arose might really revolt against the EU and where might that end ( besides 30 years of Tory government that is)?
36. Yes if you watch the golf buggy thing - Brown goes to Bush: are you driving? I think the expression on Brown’s face looked like - Bush has stiched me up here. This is why i am surprised that more people have not commented - been amused on the media. Brown seems to be lucky with the press at the moment but like all good photo calls will be spun in the long run to reflect something complete different.
Bush stamped his authority on Brown and “sat” on him. No two ways about it; the clunking fist was outsmarted by Bush
!!!
Edmund from Tokyo. Regarding Koizumi, even if he was approached, would he allow himself to be used by the LDP Dinosaurs to save them. Would he rather seem them become extinct at the next Election and see on his real proteges take over after. He must have been furious at Abe allowing back into the LDP everyone he chucked out.
Secondly if the DPJ did win. Do they have anyone with any Government experience apart from Ozawa. They need to reassure the Japanese before the election that it won’t be wholly a case of on the job training
29. the old-age pensioners are the ones who are the most politically active and likely to vote, though. These are the ones with the pound-signs stuck to their bumpers and who would doubtless turn out and vote in a referendum.
I also read somewhere recently (I admit i can’t remember where, now, I’m sorry) that UKIP voters are mostly from the over 65s age group. Not that that makes their opinions any less valid of course. Possibly a bit less tuned in to the reality of a globalised world, on average, but no less valid.
35. So we have a situation where Brown would probably like a referendum, but can”t have it, and Cameron would be happier to talk about other things, but is forced to keep going on about a referendum. isn’t this typical of how Europe is dealt with in the UK…?
40. Absolutely. I think without that promise to allow a vote, Brown could have got away with it. He could have just pointed to Maastricht, Nice and the SEA and said - you Tories didn’t call a vote on these Treaties - why should we?
But a solemn manifesto pledge makes this an entirely different matter. Especially to a new PM determined to display integrity and trustworthiness.
The only Labour hope was to pretend that this Treaty was so vastly different to the Constitution their promise was irrelevant.
This argument is already shot to pieces. Not just by Labour whistleblowers like Gisela Stuart, but by every single other politician in Europe saying Yes this is the Constitution. They are saying this because 1. it is true, and 2. they have to say it, otherwise they have to get the document ratified in referendums all over again in their own countries.
I’m not sure Blair and Brown properly thought this through in Berlin. I reckon they thought they could just wing it, chuck in a few red lines, even though they are meaningless, take off the flag and anthem bit, call it something else, and no one would notice. Bob’s your uncle.
Pitiful. Now they are in a pickle.
Unless I am mistaken all the u-turns so far have been on issues where Brown had not made strong statements in their support.
A referendum would be an issue that he has refused publicly. His image will be damaged by a u-turn on this. He also has to think about his relations with his fellow European Leaders.
My view is that he will not do it. An early election could give him the mandate not to do it. Can he delay the treaty needing parliamentary approval until after an October election? I believe that Major got elected and then passed “Maarstricht”. Brown may want the Tories talking about Europe (again) in an Oct election.
when is the communicate research poll due?
when is the communicate research poll due?
I wonder if Gordon Brown is going to regret saying this in the HoC at the beginning of July this year:
The right of all the British people to have their voice heard is fundamental to our democracy and to holding public institutions to account.
45 There won’t be any legislation prior to the New Year.
Interesting article Mike, and some interesting thoughts.
That said if Brown does a u turn will people see that as strength or weakness? Difficult to tell at this stage.
23. kletspraat.
What a load of rubbish, Martin Day! “Poodles of Brussels” - there is no-one there going to take golf buggies and conclude they are “in the driving seat”. A British PM or for that matter a french President or German Chancellor are in an immensely strong position with respect to (say) the President of the Commission (usually taken as the epitome of “Brussels” by Europhobes). Does no-one wish to develop a wider democracy? Is there no-one in this country able to see through tabloid agendas?
36. A better headline would have been “Gordon Brown enjoys camp David”
24 Martin Day
Just read another of yours. What evidence could you ever have that Lib Dems are in favour of “EU Centralism”? (or monolithic budgets, whatever you mean by that) Whole ethos of Lib Dems is DEcentralist. If you remember, “subsidiarity” is a key principle of EU operation. That is why the Regions are important to the EU, much publicised whipping boys of UKIP and their sympathisers!
I think 40 is right - it’s the broken promise issue that has the most potential to hurt Brown here - but I suspect that if he sticks to his mendacious politician’s guns on this one - “This is just a treaty, the other one was a Constitution, and hardly anyone else is having a referendum on it, etc” - most of the electorate will just hear “this side says this, that side says that, blah blah blah blah blah”. With the exception of the true believers, who have already made up their minds anyway.
Aside from the political tactics, on the issue of whether there should actually be a referendum, we were discussing it here a few days ago… The issue I raised then was that if democracy requires that constitutional changes go to a referendum in each member state, that’s presumably true in all 27(?) countries in the EU, in which case however popular a measure, it’s virtually certain to get voted down somewhere for someone’s domestic political reasons. Meaning the price of direct democracy is eternal gridlock, and the EU continuing in its current form, forever. Someone (SeanT?) rightly pointed out that if that argument was correct, nobody would ever get a referendum, however extreme the constitutional changes.
Thinking about whether there’s a practical way to fix the EU while involving the citizens directly, I wondered if something like this might work:
1) Have the governments get together and do their normal haggling and horse-trading to come up with a proper constitution.
2) Put whatever they come up with to an up-or-down vote of the people of Europe. If they turn it down, send the governments back to try again, and repeat until they come up with something (a federation, a loose association of sovereign member states, a few friends who meet occasionally for a nice game of bridge or whatever) that a majority of Europeans agree on.
3) Once some common plan for what Europe should be had been approved by a majority of Europeans, countries where more people had voted “no” than “yes” would have another referendum - this time on whether to put up with what the majority had decided or leave the EU.
HF The idea that Brown can paint the Tories as old fashioned by demanding a referendum is wishful thinking because the constitution is a live issue and the pressure will be for delivery of a Labour manifesto promise and the commitment in his July statement on the constitution to consult the people.
It will not be about rejecting the constitution as such. Look at the Hague line on this. It is always about trust, giving people a say, attempts to rush the thing through.
Mind you, if Brown wants to take on the referendum issue by saying it is only the Tories banging on about their out-of-date concerns and they can be ignored, then just watch the press put in the boot and Labour support fall.
Because here there is a way of harnessing the Eurosceptic and Europhile and libertarian in their demands for the vote that was promised and disgust at atrust betrayed.
‘Well Gordon there goes the golf buggy drivers vote!’
Nice picture of Poole Harbour Mike!
If you remember, “subsidiarity” is a key principle of EU operation. ”
It may be a key principle. It’s not a key practice.
55. Let’s accept that there are EU countries where the inhabitants are keen on much closer levels of political integration, and also countries where they’re not. Why not let the former press on with political integration, while the latter adopt a more semi-detached relationship with the EU?
52. Where did i mention “Poodles of Brussels”? which comment?
Golf buggies Brown and Bush - Lap dogs the BBC correspondent.
You are obviously one of these people who spend their time putting inacurate bar graphs through peoples letter boxes.
Nevermind - Political participation is to be welcomed; no matter how simple the contribution or simple the contributor is in your case!!!
:lol: 
55. No no. All countries must accept the general will of the European people - which is obviously for a single state, no referendum needed to prove that - no-one must be allowed to leave.
58 I thought it was barking creek?
52 & 54: It was 18 -
The other problem for the LD’s is they are on the wrong side of this issue as well. I can never understand why the LD’s have in contrast to the U.S. want the UK to become the poodles of Brussels?
TIM13, Well you may be able to get away with presenting distorted bar graphs but the LD’s are very Pro-Eu no doubt about it and they want to surrender further powers to the EU. This is the idea formed by MP’s and various LD “leaders” - no longer no one thinks the LD’s are fit for Majority Government.
Punter@42: Who knows what Koizumi would want to do… I suspect that he has enough personal relationships that he’d want to save at least a big chunk of the LDP from going down - and in any case, the dinosaurs aren’t being _that_ dinosary lately. Although it’s also conceivable that if he saw the LDP was going to be defeated anyway he’d pull his supporters out and shack up with the opposition…
On government experience in the DPJ: I’m not sure specifically, but a number of them were LDP members at one point in time, so there’s presumably a certain amount of experience other than Ozawa. But to be honest, I’m not really convinced it would be an issue. The more important question, especially in the single-seat consituencies, is probably whether or not voters consider that the person standing in _their_constituencies_ has the influence and pull to bring home the bacon.
On a slight tangent, watching the news last night they were interviewing someone in the constituency of Suzuki Muneo, who was originally in the LDP but got kicked out after he was arrested and jailed for corruption, then got out of prison and got back into the Diet as an independent. They had supported him getting back into the diet after getting out of prison, but were now disappointed and considering withholding their vote next time on the grounds that he just didn’t have the power he used to…
52 & 54: It was an interesting point though whay are the LD’s so Schizophrenic in IR?
55, 59. Quite.
The end-point solution to all this is screamingly obvious. Britain will end up as a semi-detached member of an EU, where a hardcore have gone on to complete political integration (and good luck to them). The Federasts won’t like this, neither will the UKIPers, but it accords with the wishes, I think, of the British people.
We are already there, in a way - we’re not members of Schengen, we’re not in the euro, etc. There’s an increasingly good chance we won’t sign up to this Treaty.
Even if we do sign, the crunch will come. Brussels will demand some further form of centralisation - direct taxation from the EU, a compulsory EU foreign policy, a universally elected EU president - that will absolutely need a referendum. This vote will be lost. And then we will have our semi-detached status.
Might as well cut to the chase and have the vote now.
52 & 54: It was an interesting point though why are the LD’s so Schizophrenic in IR?
66 The integrationists may not be that unhappy. They’d probably rather have true believers than a country that’s always half-hearted.
Martin 65
What IR?
No - one doubts that the Lib Dems are pro-EU - it’s in our constitution, been our policy since the Liberal Party in the 50s, for goodness sake!
I think will Brown will definitely call a referendum, and who cares if it’s a u-turn of colossal proportions. Brown seems to me a man obsessed with political clever-dickery and games playing. The prospect of an abundance of ‘Gordon the master tactician promises a Euro referendum and blows to smithereens the Tory fox’ plaudits is just too tempting for him to possibly resist.
66. If Britain was a small country this semi-detached status would already have occurred. But instead it is a large one with significant armed forces and a massive economic asset in the shape of the City of London. That’s why the European imperialists are desperate to keep the UK firmly anchored to the centre. At the same time, much of the British political elite are also desperate to remain ‘in the mainstream’ due to their personal desire to strut their stuff on the wider stage - not many politicians want power over fewer people after all.
69. IR = International Relations.
I refer you back to 54: What evidence could you ever have that Lib Dems are in favour of “EU Centralism”?
70. Party Interest not National Interest again!
Also the Flip Flop thing!!!
Like i said the other day this bloke has made some real strategic errors IMO, so many hosteges to fortune. He will be cited as weak and ineffective if he starts changing around. Brown in 4 weeks has had more positions than David Cameron has in nearly 2 years!!! 
The thing that makes me laugh is all this “Clunking fist” and “Strategic Genuis” that seems to have been taken in by the many and not the few. It will certainly backfire; Brown has gone to the party drunk the punch bowl dry and will have the mother of all hangovers
:lol: 
30 - Tipster, I got my figures from this press release from the PA Elections Editor posted on this site on Friday morning, reproduced below.
Headline summary:
Con 40.1%
Lab 31.5%
LD 21.4%
Smells more accurate than the current whiffy polls!
Where I may have been wrong is saying the projected Tory lead in May was 13%. The article below suggests it was 11.x instead, although I had got a figure of Lab 27% Tory 40% in my head from the BBC projections.
“By PA Elections Editor:
The council by-elections provided the only crumbs of comfort in a gloomy July for Tory leader David Cameron, amid disappointing results in two Westminster contests and poor opinion survey ratings.
The local polls suggest the “Brown bounce” is more of a blip.
Analysis of 12 contests over July, involving more than 20,000 voters, indicate a projected 8.6% Tory lead over Labour.
Allowing for observed differences in party performance between general elections and council polls when they have taken place on the same day, this would indicate a drop of just over 2% since May.
It would also a mean a tiny 0.5% swing to Labour since 2004 when most of the seats up for election next May were last fought.
If there is no general election in October, the 2008 council polls could be critical .
Labour would need to make big gains - the first since 1996 - to give Mr Brown the green light for a June general election.
On current trends this is not guaranteed.
The calculated three-party line-up for July is: C 40.1%; Lab 31.5%; Lib Dem 21.4%.
The only result this week saw Liberal Democrats defend their Welshpool Gungrog seat at Powys County Council, Mid Wales, despite losing nearly half their vote to non-party candidates. Tories came a poor fourth.
RESULTS: Powys County - Welshpool Gungrog: Lib Dem 234, No description 143, Ind 98, C 95. (June 2004 - Lib Dem 450, C 182). Lib Dem hold. Swing 9% Lib Dem to C.
by Richard H July 27th, 2007 at 9:35 am “
By the way I have to take issue with Mike Smithson’s point that Blair calling a referendum was a “brilliant” move. It was just a standard bit of devious maneuvering, that would been very costly when the vote inevitably was lost. But he got incredibly lucky.
No one expected the French or the Dutch to vote down the Treaty.
And now he’s left Brown with this horrible headache. Not sure how “briliant” that is.
74 - note this projection is based on 20,000 actual votes not the few hundred sampled by YouGov and others.
76 Opinion pollsters are surveying *Parliamentary* voting intentions, not local voting intentions.
Well, while we debate Europe (again), the most important relationship for Britain’s foreign policy, and possibly for our new Prime Minister’s career has had it’s first test.
how do people think Brown’s visit to Camp David went?
77 - well of course. But it’s another way of measuring public opinion, and shifts therein, isn’t it?
Why do they bother doing a projection of the national position if it’s only to be used as an indicia of where people stand on local voting intentions?
78. Well apart from Bush “sitting” on Brown with the buggy: should be alright.
A final remark on Europe, for today!
Daniel Hannan has a fascinating idea in his Telegraph blog. That Alex Salmond could call an EU Constitution referendum - in Scotland. This would thrust the whole independence issue into the foreground in Scotland, something Salmond would like, of course.
If Salmond calls a Scottish plebiscite, Brown would be forced to follow.
Francis where are you?
But there are drawbacks. A lot of Scots hate the EU coz of the fisheries disaster. I think Salmond wants their votes. So would he campaign in favour or against the Treaty? And would he have the support in the Scottish parliament to get a referendum bill? Would the Tories back him to embarrass Labour at Westminster?
Very intriguing idea, though.
79 et al.
Its another indication that Conservative voters are more likely to get off the sofa and go to the polling booth.
A few Lab supporters are obviously happy to answer the phone or log into yougov - but come to the crunch they aren’t motivated to walk to the polling station.
70. Interesting theory but one problem. Cameron has been advocating consensus politics for a while, hence Brown’s sudden desire to promote a similar message so I can only wonder if that Cameron tactic was noted and yielded more success with voters than the media gave them credit for?
Cameron has been building this strategy for 18 months with REAL actions backing the words as happened in the Education Bill. Brown has been a late convert to this new type of consensus politics.
Maybe instead of the headline “Could Gordon torpedo the Tory EU lifeboat?” it could also be “Could the issue of a referendum on the new treaty torpedo Brown’s honeymoon bounce on the back of his message of change”?
82. As long as their postal votes are ‘collected’, it doesn’t matter.
81 I’m pretty sure that would be a reserved power and hence illegal. Salmond could pass a motion in Scotland’s Parliament, but he couldn’t hold it without Westminster’s approval. He could embarrass GB but that’s all. Anything more would be illegal
78 - It depends on how well it’s spun.
85. Presumably he could call a “consultative referendum”. What’s to stop him doing that?
87. Tory controlled local authorities should do the same in England.
87 - He could get SNP-supporter Brian Souter to organise one for him.
85, 87 - like the sound of that. Imagine GB trying to hold off in the face of that combined threat. If it was something like joining the Euro or anything more than a tarting-about with the EU’s administrative arrangements, I could see the Opposition putting GB to the sword with this.
But it’s a mere tarting-about, and the vast majority of the British public couldn’t give a toss about it.
85/87. It’d be a massive waste of time and money, and be treated as such. The only people who’d vote would be those opposed to Europe and as it would make no difference to anything, it’d make the SNP look completely stupid when it got beaten… “an independent Scotland out of Europe” anyone?
81&85. I posted this last week. But if the issue of a referendum is debated or backed by Holyrood I think it would certainly get a headline or two and many column inches in the London media. That alone could be damaging for Brown and this government if they are totally entrenched on the idea of not having one.
Midway through this parliament is Brown wedded to the last Labour manifesto on Europe and therefore Blairs position which is what must be the biggest sticking point preventing Brown allowing one?
Alastair Campbell on the SNP and the lack of media coverage of Scottish politics down South.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6917079.stm
But on the other hand maybe they should occasionally take a little more notice, especially now that Labour and therefore Gordon Brown is not in charge of the agenda in Holyrood?
Margot Macdonald has re-tabled a parliamentary motion calling for a vote on the redrafted EU Treaty.
http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=1173192007
90. Yeah right, tofu-head. This is what EVERYONE ELSE in Europs says about the Constitutional Treaty.
“We have not let a single substantial point of the Constitutional treaty go… It is, without a doubt, much more than a treaty. This is a project of foundational character, a treaty for a new Europe.”
(Jose Zapatero, Spanish PM, speech, 27 June 2007)
“The good thing is…that all the symbolic elements are gone, and that which really matters – the core of the Constitution – is left.”
(Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Danish PM, Jyllands-Posten, 25 June 2007)
Austria
“The original Treaty for a Constitution was maintained in substance.”
(Austrian government website, 25 June 2007)
The new treaty “takes up the most important elements of the constitutional treaty project.”
(Guy Verhofstadt, Belgian PM, Agence Europe, 24 June 2007)
“As for our conditions… I outlined four red lines: to keep a permanent president of the EU, to keep the single overseer for foreign policy and a common diplomatic service, to keep the extension of majority voting, to keep the single legal personality of the Union. All of this has stayed.”
(Romano Prodi, Italian PM, La Repubblica, 24 June 2007)
Meanwhile, the website of the Federal Union, a pro-federal campaign group, describes the constitutional treaty as “a positive result”, “a considerable step towards a federal Europe”, “a further strengthening of the federal elements of the EU institutions”, and “exactly the recipe for a more nearly federal government at the European level” .
Think before you post. Just try.
Mike, it is arguable whether Tony Blair’s U-turn in April 2004 on having a referendum was a “brilliant move”.
And Brown is not going to agree a referendum now.
The constitution has been abandoned so a referendum is no longer relevant. The new amending treaty changes far less than the Single European Act or Maastricht - both signed up to by the Tories, when no referendum was held. UKIP and Tory calls for a referendum represent a back-door way of withdrawing from Europe altogether. All aspects of statehood from the Constitution have been abandoned, including the tiles “constitution” and “Foreign Minister”, as well as symbols such as a flag and anthem. All previous EU treaties will be maintained, not replaced.
Timing-wise, it would not fit with the electoral cycle in any case. Technical negotiations have now started on the new treaty. Euro MPs will vote on the issue, then a formal agreement will be confirmed in December. National parliaments will debate ratification of the treaty next year, and it is due to come into force on 1 January 2009.
But it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that Gordon will call an election in Spring next year. If the Tories wish to make the treaty an issue at the election, and if Dave wishes to be a second Hague and lose really big-time, that is up to him.
Labour is united on this issue and eccentric wankers like Frank Field don’t make any difference.
I am going out for a meeting shortly so won’t be able to respond to any angry europhobes until late this evening, or tomorrow morning.
Au revoir.
93. Do you think “spin” is a British monopoly, Sean?
94. Well that’s a really helpful addition to the debate. I could of course have gone straight to the website of the Labour party, or the European movement, and cut and pasted it for myself.
Or I could have taken three hundred metric tonnes of Rohypnol, which would have the same effect as your tedious and juvenile waffle.
Interesting to see the views of Lord Malloch Wotsit, who I believe is now a high-up in the Brown admin.
“The EU is heading toward one single seat within the UN institutions, according to UN Deputy Secretary General, Mark Malloch Brown. Speaking at a Friends of Europe policy
briefing on UN reform on 2 October 2006, Malloch Brown suggested that the current situation, where the European Commission has observer status in several executive boards for funds and programmes, has to evolve over time. Such a process would probably start in the development programmes of UNDP and UNICEF.”
The Constitution of course provides for the EU to speak from the British seat at Security Council meetings.
Caption Competition Time!
What’s happening here?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2007/07/30/hublair.jpg
Looks like Gordon wants to plant one full on the lips. GW doesnt look interested though.
The fox could be shot by Brown signing the treaty before parliment next sits.
He will get some flak but the issue will effectively be dead. He will try to diflect the incoming by annoucing another policy U turn. That will split the headlines. Cor, I should have been a spin doctor!!
The fox could be shot by Brown signing the treaty before parliment next sits.
He will get some flak but the issue will effectively be dead. He will try to diflect the incoming by annoucing another policy U turn. That will split the headlines. Cor, I should have been a spin doctor!!
There is a minority in the SNP who are agin the EU so I cannot see the proposal to have a vote for or against the EU constitution been pushed through by Holyrood. All elections come under the remit of the Scottish Office as it is a reserve power. Brian Soutar funding a consultative one? Pleeeeze!! Why not some rich ex-Tories to fund a UK national postal ballot instead of wasting their time with UKIP.
seanT @ 96 re EU at UN — that (especially the Security Council) is why the French and British governments might yet scupper the deal.
i’ve seen some desperate threads when Tories start debating with each other but this takes the buscuit! When Brown isn’t going to be torpedoed by the EU constitution his body language on a golf buggy is a disaster! I’d recommend you all go out and get some sun and things might look brighter in a couple of years.
100. “All elections come under the remit of the Scottish Office as it is a reserve power.” Marcia, but does it stop us having a debate about it especially when there are strong feelings from some within the SNP and the Scottish Conservatives regarding the present EU legislation on some issues?
102. Roger doth protest to much, methinks.
Guido showing excellent taste when it comes to political blogs.
http://www.order-order.com/2007/07/guidos-top-political-blogs.html
102. It is not so much Brown’s body language that is a disaster; It is the fact that Brown has been “sat” on by Bush (In the political sense). The U.S from what i have seen in the press has been incensensed by the way that Brown has being playing politics with the Transalantic relationship. In diplomatic terms Brown has been ambushed in a photo shoot.
Even Nick Robinson of the BBC has been forced to conceed that the Golf buggy was the symbolic point of the trip. It is their first point of contact as President and PM respectively and Bush has put Brown in his place. He is saying “i am the boss” - you follow. For a Labour supporter roger - you should understand that a picture says a thousand words. I conceed it will not really change anything but when the Clunking Fist is Outsmarted by Bush - You really have to ask questions!!!!!!!!!!!
:lol: 
104. Absolutely! Bob sykes excellent analysis suggests an overall Tory majority of somewhere between 30-60! So go back to your asylums and prepare for government!
100 - no Chris, it doesn’t but I fear the terrible triplets of the Daily Retard, Daily Mail and Sun would hijack any real debate on the subject if there were to be a consultative referendum. We would have a variety of scare stories to try and influence either way. It does not stop the Parliament having a debate on the subject, in fact I would welcome it. I have not made up my mind at present as to which way I would vote.
I wonder if Brown and Bush payed together?
106 & 102, with comments like that i think you have been in the sun too long. Brown and the Labour party are falling apart. No Labour posters are here today - Labour are in retreat.
108. Hard to imagine Brown paying for anything.
107.Marcia I agree about the Scottish media, but we should not be scared of those kind of media headlines because they will print them any way as the Sun did on election day in May. We should take them on by having a serious political debate.
Did you see this weeks Scottish Mail on Sunday, hilarious because it read more like the Daily Record. What an accolade.
No Labour posters are here because one look and they all crept away. Poor Dave! One glance at the obsessives on here and he’ll be back in PR before you can say Nurse Mildred Ratched
110.
Your right there it is hard to imagine Brown paying - I remeber that classic pre-budget photoshot where Brown was in a canteen and chooses his breakfast. He get’s to the till and goes “Money” and i think he tapped Balls fpr some!!!
I meant prayed!!!!
110.
Your right there it is hard to imagine Brown paying - I remeber that classic pre-budget photoshot where Brown was in a canteen and chooses his breakfast. He get’s to the till and goes “Money” and i think he tapped Balls for some!!!
I meant prayed!!!!
Cricket today: what a pile of sh**e!!!
What’s so ridiculous is the fact that numerous other heads of European countries & EU officials, senior politicians,bureacrats have confirmed that the so called treaty is the constitution with a new name.
So why does Gordon Brown insult our intelligence?Brown knows that we know,that he knows that he is lying when he says it is not the constitution re-labelled.
Only 4 weeks ago we were hearing from Brown that he was the servant of the people ,they should be consulted and listened,who said that spin was dead?
116. ‘who said that spin was dead’
That was of course, just spin.
116.
‘who said that spin was dead’
Some lard-head in an English cricket team?
Martin Day
Can you slow down with the smiley faces. They are really irritating.
99. Brown can’t sign the treaty before parliament next sits as it’s nowhere near ready. That’s why the thread is essentially speculation about speculation. There is a draft treaty, but at the moment, that’s all. The timetable, according to the FCO website is that:
“The Portuguese Presidency plans to update Foreign Ministers on the progress of the IGC at their informal meeting on 8 September. The Portuguese Presidency aims to reach agreement on a text at the informal European Council in Lisbon on 18 October, and sign it off formally at the December European Council.”
BTW - Note the date in the middle there: that won’t sit happily with an October election for those still considering that possibility.
On the main topic, no, Gordon won’t grant a referendum he thinks he’ll lose but he will be able to use the possibility that he might have to (or the Tories might call one) as a lever to get a better deal at the summit.
119:
24. Martin Day: “You are confusing EU withdrawl 1983 & 1987 by the Labour party with sceptism. The Tories have been pro EU whilst sceptical or resistant to EU bearaucracy. For instance 1984 fontainbleure summit where thatcher negoitiated a rebate and Labour gave it back in recent years”
What a load of nonsense you write! You really believe that 1983 Old Labour in wanting to withdraw from the EEC (as it was then) was not a sceptical position? LOL!!
As for the Tories being sceptical in the 80’s - pull the other one. It was Mrs Thatcher who initiated and signed the Single European Act - and that changed the EEC completely and utterly. All those health and safety directives - products of the Single European Act. More power for the Commission - product of the Single European Act. Qualified Majority voting - product of the Single European Act. It was huge, Huge! And there not only was there no referendum on it, she got rewarded by the electorate by an increased majority in 1987!
As for the rebate - there are always arguments over budgets. The rebate had to go because all of western europe is paying for enlargement - and I would like to point out that it was John Major’s Tory government that encouraged and started enlargment accession policies in 1994.
The EU as it currently stands is a Tory achievement. The treaties that Labour has signed by contrast have been minor piddly things.
The current treaty is an amending treaty - it removes some power from the Commission and gives more power to the parliament to scrutinise. It adjusts the weights of qualified majority voting that the Nice treaty brought in (which are not satisfactory). It’s a minor treaty compared to the Single European Act, and I’m not clear why anyone would vote against it - do people really want to prevent scrutiny of the Commission for instance (which is what voting against implies)? Or to keep the current voting weights?
I think people are more exercized by the word “constitution” than anything in the treaty. And the word “constitution” was only adopted because Giscard wanted to amalgamate all the previous treaties into one giant document. That idea has been dropped and there is no amalgamation.
Given that Tories didn’t have a referendum on the really important treaties like the Single Act and Maastricht, they are being opportunistic when they demand one now. I’d take them more seriously if they stood up at conference and denounced Thatcher to her face for not having a referendum on the Single European Act and reduced her to tears in the hall, the way Blair made Benn tremble in public over Clause IV. Then we’d believe you were sincere in your position.
As for referendums - I understand that in the 1973 referendum, people started off dead set against and then swung strongly for. Who wins depends on how much effort the yes camp puts in. BritSpin is right - the more eurosceptic party has lost every election in the last 30 years.
In particular cast your mind to the 2001 election. Blair made it clear during the campaign that it was his dearest wish to join the euro and Hague went about droning “two more days to save the pound”, “one more day to save the pound” - and he got hammered as the voters stuck two fingers to him and his obsession with the pound. They actually voted in Blair thinking that he was going to join the euro. That should give referendum seekers pause to think - if you risk it and lose (as is likely, because whatever people tell pollsters, they always vote in favour of Europe), that’s it for the next 30 years - it would be positive endorsement for speeding onto full union, rather than the League of european nations we have now. If you want to preserve the right of Parliament to keep the status quo, you’d be anti-referendum.
81 seanT I’m back. Europe divides the Scots Nats as well, however the SNP hardcore would prefer a union with the EU than maintain the UK even though they dislike the EU - to them Europe is the lesser of two evils and the disturbing point is that many of the more extreme nationalists preferred Napolean Bonapart and Hitler to Churchill. Many ultra left Scots Nats hoped that Argentina would take and hold on to the Falkland Islands back in 1982! Many Scots refer to the Union Flag as the ‘butcher’s apron’.
I’m please that the debates about the EU are being combined with Devolution. This shows how devious the Labour supporting McMafia has been in the last 30 years in promoting Europe and Devolution by slandering the Tories as ‘Little Englanders’ - the penny has finally dropped and the English now know who are real enemy is - The Scottish dominated Labour Party.
I really think we should allow Scotland the opportunity to vote separately on the EU constitution. The UK is breaking up, but so too will the EU. If they want to sepatately join the EU let them.
36. ChrisD “Brown looked very uncomfortable in that golf buggy with Bush and his whole body language screamed his discomfort at this type of photo call.”
He did look deeply uncomfortable, and I think the public will be pleased rather than annoyed. They don’t want another “best buddy” relationship with Bush.
112- no Labour posters here because it really is a waste of life trying to bring a modicum of common sense or intelligence to the thick activists here. I would think the collective IQ’s of Test, Martin, Witan, Bob, ukPaul, chrisd, marcus, john o, bolted horse, rick w, jamie and the many others barely combine to over double digit figures.
seanT the only intelligent Tory poster here is mad, sean fear a mason, and benedict white just too nice I can hardly believe he is a Tory.
Good night and good luck Roger
123. Francis, I don’t think Napoleon Bonaparte was around at the same time as Churchill, no matter how long Churchill was an MP…
125- and of course good luck to you as well Snowflake5. Ciao. Tyson
125 Tyson, shame on you! snowflake is here, so we are having to listen to how wonderful Labour under Brown is - and how much she admires the Member for Southampton Itchen…
122: ‘BritSpin is right - the more eurosceptic party has lost every election in the last 30 years.’
Never infer causality from correlation.
122: ‘They actually voted in Blair thinking that he was going to join the euro.’
Well, they actually voted in Blair knowing he was going to give them a referendum on it (and so no worries about voting Labour on that front). That really stuffed Hague, and he was reduced to saying a Blair referendum would be some sort of ‘fix’ - which sounds, of course, a bit desperate and conspiritorial.