What do you mean Ken is the only one being honest? Since when have any Conservatives denied that the Lisbon Treaty would stay in place if it had already been ratified?

But when have any of the Tories recently said anything other than the ambiguous "We will not let matters lie there"? A clever little deception to try to lead Tory Eurosceptics into thinking that the Tories would continue to do something tangible about the Treaty. When in actual fact they won't do anything other than enter into some sort of opt out negotiations with their tiny band of Euro partners that they know will fail.

You might be interested in the extent to which Unite placemen are quietly running the Labour Party since they have become pay masters again. Fraser Nelson has a revealing article in the Speccy.
I think what you say is right but also a little unfair .As you well know it is altogether a harder less “conservative “ measure to re open a settled treaty , it also goes against a sensible disinclination to make any UK treaty provisional on the Party in questions re-election.
Conservatives who detest the EU would be nervous about anything as radical as leaving an organisation we have now been tied to for so long and ideally would prefer a slow process of withering to anything sudden. I share this pessimistic view of overly doctrinal radicalism and we must always start form where we are not where we would have liked to be .

You should I feel balance your point by admitting that a Conservative Party would not have avoided the promised referendum.

A Government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have...

Newmania, whether the Conservatives would have held a referendum - they never have before - or used a similar acrobatic device to avoid one, is pure conjecture. Promising one if it has not been ratified doesn't mean much really. If the Irish vote NO again it won't be ratified and a referendum would be meaningless, and if they vote YES it will be ratified before a general election.

As for Unite having a say in how their money is spent - doesn't Lord ashcroft have a say on how his money is spent? Although he probably has to rely on long distance information.

Newmania, whether the Conservatives would have held a referendum - they never have before - or used a similar acrobatic device to avoid one, is pure conjecture.

Poppy cock.Why do you think Cameron has been obliged to shack up with Latvian Nazis et al ? There has been plenty of the usual crap about leaving the ‘relevant centre’ and joining the ‘lunatic fringe’ . You cannot have it both ways. “Cameron forced into extreme dangerous out of step Euro Policy by ‘nutty Party’ “...says Polly Toynbee , and yet said ,’nutty Party’ unable to exert influence over devious Cameron “ says Piper .
If the referendum is lost here ,as it would be, then much more than the treaty is under threat as you ought to know , and about time . There is considerable panic about this very possibility. I am surprised you many progressive friends haven’t mentioned it to you.
Lord Ashcroft has no formal position of that sort and I am not sure what you think he might want . Unite are in effect buying policy on behalf of their members , I see no point of comparison whatsoever . The Conservative Party would be delighted to do without Ashcroft and the Unions, although he is a great man and would always have an influence emanating form his personal achievements and popularity.

Bob
You've made the case that if the EU can grant workers' rights it can also take them away before.

What's missing from that analysis is a recognition that the Thatcherite vision for Britain in Europe was as the base for cheap labour. They intended that Britain would have the weakest protection for workers in the EU (or least burden on business, as they would put it) and in turn attract business.

That strategy failed because the rest of Europe saw through it immediately and refused to allow Britain to import their jobs.

Inside the EU the Conservatives would find it much harder to reduce workers' rights as an attack on UK workers would be an attack on all EU workers.

But Stephen, you can't work on the principle that the EU will always have this cosy social democrat outlook. If we have a not inconceivable situation where Christian Democrat/Conservative/Hard Right elements control the EU counties and dominate the Commission, then if they can give you rights, they can take them away... with no come back!

Clamping down on workers' rights across Europe would have the same impact as introducing the Delors Social Chapter measures across Europe. It may be more problematic in some countries (France) than others, but there is little internationalist outlook from the trade union general secretaries who still fall for the British Jobs for British Workers guff. And I doubt their capacity in their current weakened state to fight any form of co-ordinated international action.

Newmania... Bob Piper disagrees with Polly Toynbee. Is that supposed to be news? Cameron is joining with his nutty far right friends to appease his madcap Generals in the Shires, not because he thinks he will have to do anything. And if you think Ashcroft and the MIC don't 'buy' Tory policies at least as much as the trade unions you are dafter than I thought (with all due respect... as most politicians say when they've slapped you across the face with a wet fish).

We need a direclty elected EU president and a federal EU state aswell as a parliament for the United Nations and the march towards democratic world government.

... and a fundamental and irreversible shift in the balance of wealth and power throughout the World!

When's that referendum being held?

Probably not till 2671 or there abouts, unfortunately.