Sunday, October 6, 2013

Sooner might be better

One of the biggest problems David Cameron faces over his beloved EU is that a growing majority of people don't share his views on it... that we'd be better off in. In essence that's why he promised a delayed referendum on it, knowing full well that he could change his mind after an election, plus give the EU some time to bribe or influence the outcome of such a delayed response.
A leading Conservative backbench MP has said he will try to force the government to hold an early vote on whether Britain should leave the EU.
Adam Afriyie said voters were "not convinced" by the prime minister's promise to put the issue to an "in or out" referendum in 2017 - after the next general election.
Writing in the Mail on Sunday, he said he would push for a vote next October.
Mr Afriyie - who has denied newspaper claims he is being groomed to replace party leader David Cameron - said he would table an amendment to the European Union (Referendum) Bill on Monday.
"Only by setting an early date can we kick-start EU renegotiation talks and give the British people what they so clearly want - a say on our country's future with Europe," he wrote.
"The fact is, the British people are not convinced there will be a referendum at all if we wait until after the next general election. So many things can change.
Actually, oddly enough I'm pretty sure we will be offered a referendum, however, I suspect it will be couched in such terms to either confuse or confound those who want to leave. It would also be on top of a massive EUphile bribes and media campaign to convince us to stay.
Cameron's reaction was typical, if the motion was tabled he threatened to take his marbles and leave remove his promise of a referendum. He's far more concerned at keeping the status quo rather than actually dealing with a problem that's tearing his party apart both at grass-roots level as well as at the Parliamentary one.
What's really needed is simply a Parliamentary decision via a free vote to leave and use the corresponding section in the Lisbon Treaty to do so... that would be the treaty we were promised a referendum on by Cameron, but later refused as Gordon brown snuck in the back entrance to sign it. However as it is we'll get the usual squeals from the EUphiles about it being 'economic suicide' (it isn't) How much the EU does for us (well that's true they've certainly 'done' for us in the past) whilst not being able to give any real hard examples. Plus we'll get the usual Barroso/Rumpy Pumpy pronouncements driving a bigger wedge between what the politicians want and what the public actually want which is a free trade zone vs closer political union.
The biggest danger of demanding a referendum is that we'll get one. The biggest problem after that is that we know if we get one then the fix is in.

2 annotations:

Barman said...

The biggest danger of demanding a referendum is that we'll get one. The biggest problem after that is that we know if we get one then the fix is in.

Great post...

A referendum cannot be won by those of us that want out...

The EU will throw a millionteen €uros at the problem and if we vote 'OUT!' they will simply make us vote again...

The only way out is to vote in a Euro sceptic party and have them set the thing in motion on day #1 of the new parliament...

Martin said...

Brown signed the Lisbon Treaty around the same time that he and Blair helped the Mccanns out of a pickle on foreign soil.