Why all the fuss over an issue that barely registers?
March 6th, 2008
Does anybody out there care about EU matters?
After last night’s big commons vote rejecting a referendum on the Lisbon treats it is perhaps worth looking at how all of this ranks in the public’s mind. For once again there’s strong polling evidence that it barely registers as an issue that voters care about.
For after a period when the big political story has been Britain’s relationship with the EU the latest Ipsos-MORI monitor is out with, amongst other things its regular survey of what people see as the “..important issues facing Britain today”.
This monthly finding is unique in British polling because the firm has been asking it for decades in exactly the same form and because it is entirely unprompted. It’s a two stage process. Firstly those being questioned are asked which is the “most important issue” and then, again unprompted, they are asked to name “other important issues”. The answers to the first part are in the second column and the third column combines the responses to both questions.
Of course the political row has been over whether manifesto commitments have been honoured rather than the substantive matter are the EU itself - but you would have thought that something that saw such noise and the rebellion in the ranks of Lib Dem MPs would have been on a policy debate that is higher up the public’s agenda.
As can be seen in the findings reproduced above MORI find, yet again that this not not a matter that people care enough about to rank amongst their “most important issues”.
The latest voting intention figures in the poll show a slight change on the firm’s January surveys which had Labour with a one point lead. The shares are with changes on the previous month - CON 39%(+2): LAB 37%(-1): LD16%(nc).
The field work was completed a week last month so the survey pre-dates the YouGov poll that we had at the weekend.
MessageSpace Advertising
Not really but they care about split parties. That’s why this is important and why its been badly handled.
Exactly James - why get yourself in a position of splits over something that hardly anybody gives a damn about?
I think its a miscalculation. Clegg thought that he could simultaneously appeal to europhiles, euroskeptics, and euroskeptic instinctive pro-europeans. In theory the first group are pleased that he isn’t calling for a referendum on the LT and thus endangering the project. The second group, who are important chunk of the LD vote in the south west, would see that they were offering an in/out referendum and might see this as their chance to leave europe, so those who agree with the libs on something but are turned off by their europe position will vote for the party/still vote for the party in those marginals (e.g. Frome). The third group (and I’d place myself in that category) would welcome the democratic means of furthering a project they like but the possibility of some serious thought about the future and a critique of some of the current processes. As it happens, the pro-europeans don’t care, the euroskeptics weren’t convinced, and my lot think that if we can’t have an in/out referendum we should have a LT one.
It would have been clever politics as well to offer in/out and LT as a back up as many Tory back benchers would be tempted to vote with their consciences and try to get an in/out plebecite.
Miscalculations and egg on faces all round.
Although I think I agree that Europe isn’t something that most people particularly care about, a couple of caveats about the way you’re interpreting that survey:
The stereotypical Eurosceptic of my imagination doesn’t just care about the EU as an issue in itself; They care about it because it affects a bunch of other things which they think are important. For example, we have problems with crime and vandalism and anti-social behaviour because we signed away our right to deal with evil-doers with the necessary strictness to some European court or other. And we can’t stop all these immigrants coming into our country and polluting our neighbourhoods with their funny foreign cooking smells because we’ve signed away our ability to protect our borders.
And there’s some truth to this as well. For example, the government would have a hard time reducing immigration without going back on its commitment to the EU to allow free movement. (They could reduce immigration from non-EU countries, but that would affect the labour market in a way that would attract more people from poor EU countries, which would probably reduce the impact of what they were doing.)
In reality, I don’t think there’s enough difference between the positions of the main parties on the UK’s relationship with Europe to make any substantial difference on many of these issues. But Eurosceptics who post here tend to have some very optimistic ideas about the kind of agreements Britain could get if it would just stand up for itself, and a lot of (mainly right-wing) voters probably agree.
Also, the political implications of arguing about Europe may go beyond Europe itself; For example, promising to take a strong stand against things imposed on us by Johnny Foreigner may impress voters who think we have too many immigrants, even if it wasn’t directly related.
Finally, there’s a small, vocal majority who do care about Europe as an issue in itself, and they have a disproportionate tendancy to own newspapers.
Sorry, that last sentence should have said “a small, vocal minority”.
5 - I like the last sentence.
5.
lol. Mike S, are you actually trying to wind me up? Do your page-visits increase when I totally go over the top?
Sadly I’m not going to snap at the fly today. Am in too serene a mood. Sun shining, book finished, pool waiting, ten days of chill-out time then I’m off to Brazil.
So I’ll restrict myself to one post: basically I agree with Edmund in Tokyo.
Europe only matters to about 30% of the people (see the returns from the private referenda). Maybe 25% of that 30 are passionate eurosceptics, and 5% passionate Federalists.
The rest don’t understand Europe, don’t care that much, generally mistrust it, but don’t let it bother them. They have the same attitude to Europe as they do to most “conceptual” politics.
And even of that 30% very few would ever say, most of the time, that Europe is a number 1 issue: crime, immigration, health, schools, going-to-war, etc etc are always gonna be more important.
But, to answer yr question, if europhiles think this deeply submerged nature of the eurodebate is always going to make it easier for them, then they are wrong. For many reasons.
As Edmund says, those that do care about Europe care a lot: and they are politically engaged: they will come out and vote, even canvass and campaign.
That will have some affect in marginal seats, it will be bad for Labour and Lib Dem MPs in tight contests.
Also, this issue matters a lot to some MPs - hence the resignation of three Lib Dem frontbenchers. People like Nick Palmer may have no compunction in breaking a solemn promise - they even gloat about it - but there are some (few) MPs who hold principle and country more important than party or even career. They know that this is a nasty betrayal. This issue splits parties, badly. It split the Tories but they are now united and sceptic. Now it is splitting the Lib Dems.
It may one day crack open Labour: depending on where the EU goes next.
Moreover, Europe matters a very great deal to the commentariat. People like me - writers and journalists. Newspaper owners. Pundits and experts. In the main these people are eurosceptic: and becoming increasingly so in the face of europhile lies and evasions. This also matters. These people form and lead opinions: they create the climate in which voters think.This is also bad for Labour and Lib Dems - e.g. the idea is now lodging in the public mind that we cannot trust anything lefties say in a manifesto.
FWIW, on this issue, I think the Murdoch papers and Dacre realised some time ago that they couldn’t beat the government numbers on this referendum debate, not least cause of Lib Dem craven-ness, so they have called a halt to the battle. But they still want to win the war - believe me - and they will be nursing their grievances: and waiting for a more opportune moment to strike.
Finally, the submerged nature of the EU debate hides much more dangerous reefs and shoals for the government: because it affects everything else. Immigration is now largely an EU matter, and it will become more so under the Constitution. Crime and justice are being moved to Brussels. Tax is being slowly harmonised. Foreign policy is now subject to QMV - under the Treaty.
Eventually the people will realise that all these powers have been handed to Europe: and these are the red-button issues. And British governments have made themselves pwoerless to act by handing over so much sovereignty, without the people’s consent.
e.g. I remember a Tyson post a few weeks back when he was saying Europe doesn’t matter, why don’t the sceptic shut up and see the people don’t care, blah blah - the very next moment he was saying what really matters, to him, and others, is little things like HIPs and how annoying they are.
HIPs, of course, spring largely from an EU directive.
When the public eventually see this, that so much of what they dislike in their governance springs from our absorption by Brussels, they might just rise up and bite you people on yer big fat well-upholstered europhile a$$es.
So there is your answer. Europe matters a great deal, but in a strange and treacherous way that isn’t shown clearly by polls.
The only place where I disagree with Edmund is in Britain’s eventual semidetachment from the EU. We are already halfway there; outwith the euro, Schengen etc.
I expect a Tory government to formalise this position and claw some powers back; in return the euros will agree to this, coz they want our trade and market, but they would like to be rid of this turbulent member preventing them from achieving proper Federalism, which is what their elites want, and intend to get.
So everyone will be happy. Apart from the europhiles in Britain. Shame.
OK that is definitely my last post on Europe for, ooh, several days.
xx
I’m not sure this is really fair Mike. Europe isn’t really an “issue” as such, but more the way this country is governed. It’s the same way that illegal donations matters to people but isn’t “an issue facing this country”.
I would like to see the question asked “Is the relationship between the European Union and the British government something you think important?” I bet you’d find the ‘yes’ answers to that would be over 3%.
Besides, even if people didn’t care about it, that doesn’t mean it isn’t important. Most people in the US don’t care about Campaign Finance Reform, but it would hugely affect the way politics is done in the States, just as a change in relationship with the EU would affect politics in this country.
4. Again, not as a rabid point, but wouldn’t you say that Margaret Thatcher getting unanimous agreement on a British rebate would have been overly optimistic before it happened? What about the French constantly opposing effective CAP reform? The British have major influence in the world - to pretend we have to just go along with Europe to keep everyone happy is just silly. Different countries are expected to have hard negotiating positions. Nobody minds and people move on.
I don’t know the details of the rebate case (specifically, I don’t know what she gave up in exchange). But I’m not saying that governments shouldn’t have hard negotiating positions; Indeed, I suspect the current government does as well, although not necessarily on the issues the sceptics think are really important. My entirely unsupported hunch would be that a lot of the key substantive issues involving the national interest are quite technical and obtuse, so it’s always possible to trade a bunch of important concessions that hardly anyone understands for some kind of high-profile victory. But I’d be interested to hear if there’s anyone one there who has been close enough to these negotiations carried out by different governments over the years to tell us whether or not the key factor in whether or not Britain gets a good deal is how obstructive it’s prepared to be.
An easy-to-understand example of the kind of thing where I think there’s a tendancy for sceptics tend to be overoptimistic about what they could get if Britain pulled away from the European project would be the Common Fisheries Policy. A lot of people dislike the thing, and think that Britain would do better if they left it (either by staying in the EU or by opting out). But in or out, they’d likely want to be part of an agreement with their neighbours to prevent over-fishing. So you’d have the same people negotiating with the same partners, who would probably end up with something a lot like… the Common Fisheries Policy.
Sorry to be OT, but it’s more or less impossible here in Oz for me to be in a debate at UK times….
I wanted to respond to my being denigrated for saying that “yes, I’ll write off Hillary.” after Tuesday’s events. In Texas, it’s likely that Obama will have more delegates. In the Caucus there, he won, 55:45. The overall affect on delegates from Tuesday is at most +10 for Hillary (about 180 to Obama, 190 to Hillary). By no stretch of the imagination can that be described as a big win, one which gives it all back to her.
I’ve lost count of the number of posts on various threads on pbc in the last couple of weeks which have been to the effect of Hillary cannot win unless something miraculous happens. And it’s true. She knows this, so now her campaign is pushing for Michigan and Florida to be re-run.
So Hillary’s personal ambition is to be put above the Democratic Party. It’s almost as if her viewpoint is: if I don’t win, then no other democrat will, because I’ll tear the party to pieces before they do. Loathsome.
And she has the nerve to say that she’d be better at withstanding a prolonged assault by the GOP in the General Election and beyond. Everyone knows that the Clinton cupboard is full to bursting with skeletons!
In my view, when Obama wins the nomination, as he surely will, half the GOP will vote for him in thanks for dealing a death-blow to Hillary’s political ambitions - as well of course as down to him being a breath of fresh air like no other Presidential candidate before him.
I think this is one issue qwhere the polls are demonstrably wrong, showing how unreliable non vote intention questions are.
T
he iwar balllots in marginals had huge turnout - 40% in Gedling, 20,000 voters in Eastleigh. Votes which they knew had no legal effect.
that just doesn’t happen if people don’t care.
I think it’s in Obama’s interests for Florida and Michigan to be re-run too! He would lose in Florida yes, but could do very well in Michigan. He would not lose much of his overall lead and the pressure on the superdelegates to respect the delegate count would be immense and the potential excuse given by the Florida and Michigan situation removed.
In addition it would remove any sense of illegitimacy about his victory.
The fall-out from the euro-events of the last few days will have quite an impact on national politics, even if the issue barely registers as an issue in its own rights.
The Conservatives will have been seen to have acted with honour - which will be a major narrative in the next election campaign and will help with their rehabilitation to viability. The Labour and LibDem manifestos will be open to derision as being worthless pieces of sh1t. It will also feed into the notion that politicians are worthless pieces of sh1t too.
Whilst this afflicts all parties, I would suggest it will hurt the LibDems most. LibDem voters (in my experience) liked the LibDems because it offered them a moral refuge, a loftier perch from which to look down on the other parties with an inate sense of superiority, innoculated from the tedious grime of workaday politics. They knew their party wouldn’t achieve power; but that didn’t matter, not if you had principles. The sanctimony oozes from the pores of a number of posters here.
Well, guess what - after Clegg’s petty politicking and crass ineptitude, those lofty perches just came a whole lot nearer to sea-level. Several decades of positioning - “we may be powerless, but at least we know we are morally superior in our powerlessness” - just got bulldozed by Boy Clegg. Way to go.
Mike, I’d agree Europe isn’t the most pressing issue but look at a few of the other issues that are below Europe in the ranking.
Council tax - so no-one cares about council tax? Why then did the Lib Dems make that a centrepiece policy in the last election? Shouldn’t have bothered as no-one cares.
Animal welfare - shame that this doesn’t interest anyone, RSPCA & other animal charities must be suffering badly from lack of funds.
Public transport - don’t know why the Government bothers with billions in rail investments as it isn’t something people care about.
Just a bit above Europe are petrol prices, low wages, poverty and pensions - unimportant.
Actually as a liberal, a democrat and a eurosceptic I’m reasonably happy with the way things have gone.
Clegg has tried to use illiberal and undemocratic means to support something itself illiberal and undemocratic. He won’t repeat the experiece, which is good.
Clegg is an intelligent and reasonable man who will have learnt the hard way that a large number of LibDems and a massive majority of everyone else do not share his “my EU right or wrong” technocrat views.
The public now knows that a lot of LibDems find the EU less than entirely marvellous… not a single LibDem voted against the referendum and a good number were prepared to defy the leadership to vote in favour.
All these are actually very good things.
15, And voting systems/electoral reform doesn’t even register at all …
I don’t give a toss about the EU treaty. Another great thread therefore Mike.
None of my friends ever talk about the issue. The only people I know who talk about this are complete mavericks.
The No-vote in the Dutch referendum in 2005 helped the Dutch Government to achieve a quite substantive rebate on the budget contribution.
PAINT UPDATE : DAY TWO
Drying ……………..
I see this topic just pipped ‘Animal Welfare’in MORI’s poll this morning which gave me a clue as to why you started this thread.
I suspect you thought from an anthropological point of view it would be instructive to bring out all the Tory nutjobs so the 97% of the rest of us could see what makes them tick.
Which reminds me of the story of when the Queen went to visit a lunatic asylum and she was shown round by a delightful………………
Simple answer to the question Mike - because when the real issue is trust, then boy does that matter.
There were of course more Labour rebels than Lib Dem one, but given the size of the parliamentary party, and the seniority of the rebels, it’s no surprise that the party are staring in the headlights over this.
I’d largely agree with SBS’s comments last night (and others) that this was a stinker of a policy Clegg inherited from Ming, and he didn’t seem to realise how badly it had goen off until too late. I remember the pb.c thread last Lib Dem conference on this - Mike asked if Ming had made the right call, and the post that sticks in my mind was from the eloquent Julian H - a simple ‘No.’ It was clear at the time that Ming was not carrying the party on this, and I was hoping that Huhne at least might have backed down during the leadership campaign.
The Lib Dems win votes as much by how they conduct themselves as what their policies are, and Nick Clegg promised a new honest politics. It’s jarred very badly over the last few weeks when his answer to the referendum question has been “The referendum you really want is one about……” - in my view it’s exactly this “You’re asking the wrong question, what you want to ask is” mentality that is turning people off politics.
Anyway, he’s hardly in trouble as we can’t afford to go whispering about our new leader, but it’s been a bit of a wake up call for him that he has to play some smarter politics as leader, and it is a shame that he has lost three principled and effective frontbench speakers.
But fury and memories of this will subside - the long term winners are likely to be the Tories on both being trusted to keep the manifesto commitment, and trusting the people on the issue - Cameron is campaigning hard on trust at the moment and it could be a masterstroke.
It might not be the most important issue, but it is one of the issues that concerns a lot of voters. I think what people understand by “most important” is “most urgent”. We have been in the EU for 30 years, it is a problem without a sense of urgency.
“The British have major influence in the world ……..”
Some people really do live in a parallel universe!
It’s an interesting thread so far and I’ll try to avoid winding anyone up. One difficulty in discussing it seriously is that partisans on both sides have difficulty in accepting that the others might mean what they say. Europhiles tend to think that critics are ultra-nationalists who just pretend to worry about referendums; Eurosceptics tend to think that nobody can possibly believe that the Treaty is a minor issue. So it’s not just that we disagree - the people who are really interested think the other side is lying. That makes it a lot harder to debate amicably than, say, NHS reform.
But leaving aside our own views, I think seanT’s percentages are about right. A fair number of people are mildly interested. Interested enough to return a prepaid ballot on the issue and to prefer, if asked, to be consulted in an official referendum. Not interested enough to write to MPs in large numbers, which is one reason why the Labour rebellion never really took off (compared with those early predictions of 100+ rebels) - it’s not registering in postbags compared with, say, abortion or animal welfare.
People who are interested tend to be sceptical, to a greater degree than any other EU country. They largely accept that it’s probably necessary to be in the EU, but they read a hostile press and blame all kinds of ills on it, as Edmund describes. Polls show that in most EU countries, people trust the European Commission and European Parliament more than their own countries’ institutions: that’s certainly not the typical British view. Part of the reason is that Europhile politicians rely on the grudging underlying acceptance and don’t really argue the case for the EU.
But does it affect voting? Not very much. It’s been an issue on the Tory right, but I think Cameron has done enough to keep them happy and he will successfully face down demands to commit to a retrospective referendum or renegotiation in more than a Wilson-like token tweaking. There is definitely a Eurosceptic Labour and LibDem vote, but if you really feel that being Eurosceptical is the decisive thing for you, you won’t have voted for either party for some time. Tories hope that the argument on the manifesto commitment will help their ‘trust’ theme even among people who don’t really care about the EU, but the “is the treaty like the constitution?” question produces a large ‘don’t know’ segment in polls, and people who don’t care about the EU tend to feel it’s neither very clear-cut nor very interesting.
What does cause problems is the impression of shambolic party management, and it’s clearly not been a good week for Clegg. But MPs squabbling among themselves is a Westminster village thing, and I doubt if any damage has been done than a reshuffle after the issue is over won’t sort out. The main LD priority is to stop digging and say as little as possible on the issue while it goes through the Lords. I doubt if the Tories are going to pursue it hard for long - they’ve secured their sceptic vote, but won’t want to fall into the Hague trap of looking obsessive about it, and IMO don’t actually see change in this area as a priority if they take power.
It would be interesting to see the results of this poll if people were prompted for responses.
[25] I think the key is in Nick’s last sentence. Yes, this will be a useful issue, in a “dog whistle” kind of a way, for Cameron at the next election. But what will he do about it in office? And will that satisfy Euro-sceptic newspaper owners? And could the latter be bought off - say by offering Murdoch the Beeb on a plate and the “Mail” all those juicy public sector job ads the Grauniad nowadays lives off?
I was very pleased to see Annette Brooke was one of the LD rebels - she is a hard working “constuency” MP who has built up a strong voter base because of the respect she has earned from them. I have helped at election times in the past and am sure she will continue to consolidate her seat for the LDs.
Curiously, MORI often found 20%+ in the 1990s who would describe Europe as an important issue - and I don’t think the salience of the issue has declined over that period, even if MORI say people have become less interested.
Most people have made good points on this thread. The degree of interest - although I don’t really think Nick Palmer can be confident that the Conservatives would no nothing to recover lost powers in office, not at all.
29 - Sean, I have a feeling that Mori’s questioning has changed - like i say i think they used to prompt people with a list of issues.
27. IA. “But what will he do about it in office?”
I don’t think we need worry about that!
(Which reminds me of this wonderful old ad….)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6zOLtvIBS4
The polls find 2% of voters prefer UKIP. The survey above finds 1% put Europe as the most important issue and 3% as one of the most important issues. UKIP’s support fits into this group of voters.
What of the Lib Dems? In the past they have had to have free votes on Europe because many of their MPs have had to appear to be eurosceptic just to get elected. The Lib Dems are notorious for facing both ways on issues. That occurs because they are more focused/ruthless than the others to get elected first and worry about party policy as a secondary matter.
Therefore we find in one council they argue for a policy and in another they argue against it.
Ironic that Shirley Williams who has sat at the heart of party splits with Labour and then split with the SDP, has also caused this split in the Lib Dems by saying it was her way or the Labour whip. Was Shirl worth splitting the parliamentary party over?
25 Nick, don’t disagree much but I get the feeling that most MPs and the Government think that once the Lisbon Treaty is through Parliament and is ratified, that’s it, we can forget Europe. Adrian Hamilton in the Independent has a good column on Europe today and sums up IMHO the general view:
“..here is no democratic will, in England at least, behind Europe. People know it’s there. They probably fear the disruption of a complete withdrawal but, on the matter of its direction and its structure, they would rather not know. If only it would just go away.”
If only it would just go away - but it won’t.
The next stages will be starting, the next set of proposals being honed. The 80’s were dominated by the Single Market, the 90’s by the Euro, the noughties by the Constitution/Reform Treaty. What next ? Probably formalisation of Common policies - Immigration, Foreign Policy, Defence maybe moves on Taxation and Justice. Whatever Government we have, Labour, Tory or a coalition, will be dragged again, again and again to summits and will fight for Red Lines or Opt-outs, never leading but always having to follow because it doesn’t have the confidence that democratic legitimacy would provide.
I was listening to part of the news on radio 4 this morning, mainly because my MP3 player wouldnt play any music for some reason. They had a lib dem MP trying to defend the position of his party, he did ok, but at the end he went on a massive brown nosing excercise. He prasied nick clegg to the heavens ‘a warm human being, self depricating, passionate defender of the party’ etc etc and saying how he’d be leader for a long time yet. The interviewer replied ‘well, I didn’t ask about the leadership, but there we go’. He hadnt asked about Clegg’s leadership furture, he hadnt even touched on the subject, and I think he thought it significant that a lib dem MEP thought he had to prasie Clegg and defend his leadership future without prompting.
Has Murdoch/Sun finally nailed its colours on where they stand with Gordon Brown?
“Regarding voters as idiots has become a hallmark of this Government. On crime and immigration as well as the EU, Labour arrogantly brush aside legitimate public anxieties. Only the Tories emerged with dignity last night by keeping their word and trying to win a referendum. The Lib Dems were a laughing stock, unsure whether to vote, walk out or resign. As if anyone cared.
Mr Brown deserves to be held to account for such a fundamental and far-reaching breach of promise. The Sun will make sure that he is.”
http://tinyurl.com/32mhab
8. 15. Some goods points there, re. the surprisingly low rankings of transport, council tax, and poverty (on the basis of the latter finding, presumably Labour should shut up shop?) - and on the very respectable turnout in the private referendums.
On the face of it, there seems to be some contradiction here. But isn’t there a possibility that one reason for the apparently low ratings of some of these issues is that they overlap with others higher up?
So for example ‘council tax’ clearly overlaps with ‘taxation’, unemployment and inflation with ‘economic situation’ etc. I wonder if a lot of EU-related gripes have become conflated with other issues too - for example with immigration and foreign affairs.
It’s also astonishing that MPs behaviour/corruption doesn’t seem to feature at all - unless that too has been conflated with another issue, e.g ‘morality’ etc.
35. that article pretty much slagged off labour and gordon brown very badly, called the lib dems a laughing stock and praised the tories to high heaven! if it continues things should be fun
The Conservatives are obviously pushing this hard because they are looking to damage the credibility of the Government, in the same way that they rabidly pursued the loss of disks with personal records on. All these incidents add up over time and people will remember them at the next election when they decide if Labour are capable of running a country and decide if Labour can be trusted.
The strategy makes perfect sense, even if the issue itself is relatively small.
http://lettersfromatory.wordpress.com
HF - that’s localism at work.
25. Well, remarkably I agree with Nick Palmer, EXCEPT for one major thing. And in a way this reinforces his point about two wholly opposing mindsets.
We think you are lying on a fundamental issue, we think some of you are outright traitors; you think we are petty nationalists, or just silly partisan point scorers.
The difference is that we understand your mindset better than you understand ours.
We know how europhiles think: some of them are genuine internationalists, who see the nation state as a rather tiresome and reactionary legacy, getting in the way of progressive politics (I’d put you in there, Nick P).
Some europhiles are, by contrast, quite patriotic: but see the EU as a pragmatic way of furthering national interests, the pooling of sovereignty. Many are anti-American, and would like to see a counterweight to US power. some are just lefty, and hope - maybe forlornly - that the EU will further lefty causes defeated in Britain by Thatcher.
Most europhiles are liars (I’m sorry, but this is true) as they know that the EU is progressing to a quasi-Federal status, and they know that the people will never vote for this: as Peter the Punter says: so europhiles lie about everything to do with the EU, from its powers to its treaties to whether we can have a referendum or not.
Some europhiles think these lies are permissible, as the project is so important (I’d put Clegg and Miliband here). Some are maybe uncomfortable, but reckon everyone lies about everything,especially Tories, so what the hell (I’d put you Nick, and people like Jack W in here, and many other europhiles).
Some lie to themselves, I think: they suffer a cognitive dissonance: they know the EU is undemocratic and without legitimacy. However they can’t let the EU fail. So they are morally paralysed and just kid themselves that integration will end soon, ending their mental pain. Probably a few of the remaining europhile Tories are in this boat.
So that’s the europhile mindset. We sceptics understand it very well. But you don’t understand us quite so well. You think we are foaming nationalists and/or rabid nutters, obsessed and silly.
In your more lucid moments you admit we have the moral highground, but you think our views are still ludicrous overwrought, even if technically right. You also think that because we a bit mad, the madness will pass.
This is where you are wrong. I have been a eurosceptic for twenty years, and my anger has grown over that time: from a mild irritation with Brussels to a serious grievence to where it is now: genuine rage at the lies and deceptions.
Many have followed my path. What was a fringe opinion in the Tory party - the “bastards” - is now the established position of the party. The europhiles are a tiny dwindling bunch.
I also think euroscepticism is spreading into other parties, as we see. This is inevitable as the true nature of the EU project becomes ever harder to deny. Europhiles are fervently praying that this latest Treaty is the endpoint of integration: it isn’t. Europe doesn’t work like that. Already integrationists are dreaming up new projects (trust me, I read this stuff online).
Sarko wants a new political EU. Frattini wants harmonised laws. The Federalists are just waiting for ratification and then they will press on. The EU is a “non imperial empire” as Barosso says, empires can only survive by expanding. As soon as empires stop conquering, they implode. They have no other raison d’etre: nothing to hold them together but the sense of their power and inveitablity.
But to go back to my point about mindsets. Europhiles underestimate the seriousness of the eurosceptic position. They can’t see beyond the froth and the bile. (And I accept there is a lot of that, not least from me!)
The Tory party is now very very eurosceptic. They are hiding it, somewhat, because they have learned that looking as mad as me doesn’t win elections.
But when the Tories do get into power there will be an EU reckoning. Cameron may not particularly want a huge bust-up. But he will have to have one: as it is now the overriding wish of most of his MPs and activists. THE issue. For a lot of people it is one of the main if not only reason they will support the Tories.
Cammo knows this. He also knows he needs to restore trust in politics: that can only be done by being honest about Europe. Honesty about Europe means giving the people what they clearly want: semidetachment from Brussels.
So yes we have opposing mindsets. But you underestimate our seriousness.
And that really is my last enormous post on this topic. I’m gonna read my new book over now. Oo-er.
A number of reasons:
1) the relationship between the EU and the UK is being spoken about openly only by sceptics. EU-philes shove the issue under the carpet, and don’t bother with little things like democracy. Personally, I dislike unaccountable, unelected faceless bureaucrats.
2) manifesto lies are not something to be proud of.
3) that question is badly phrased. Now, you might think I’m biased, but just look at pensions. That has the same number of people (1%) who rate it as the top issue, but remember what happened when Brown offered a ha’penny rise per week? It’s low on the list because it’s only intermittently on the news agenda.
There’s also the political ramifications as Treacherous Calamity is now well aware of.
sorry - it posted too soon. was trying to say:
HF- that’s localism at work. The Lib Dems don’t believe that you can prescribe policies which will work for every local situation, and we’d rather empower the local representatives. Take city academies: opposed nationally but Lib Dem councils such as Islington have accepted that they may be the best solution locally. The press and the Tories will enjoy the story of ‘party splits’ but it’s something the party can be proud of; in particular Labour insist that Westminster knows best and imposes solutions that simply don’t work on the ground as a result.
Here’s a test to see if people will care about Lisbon in 12 months time:
Q:Which three of the 50 new areas of qualified majority voting do you think will be politically important in 2009? (can you name any?)
Q:What executive powers will the permanant president of the European Council have (A: None)
Q:What executive powers will the foreign policy representative have (A: None)
Q:Could new areas of QMV be able to be introduced without the say so of parliament (A: No)
This treaty is really not very important and when it is passed I hope the most rabid of you will soon realise that you have wasted a lot of anger and bile on very, very little. I wonder if the electorate will notice this substance under the screams of “betrayal”. Probably not and Brown and Clegg are damaged.
It’s great politics for Cameron though in the short term, but by stoking the fire of the europhobes he will be dogged by this during his 2010-2014 term as PM. Long term all the leaders are losers on this.
30:
I can confirm that the way we ask the question has not changed; it is an open-ended question with no prompting, showcards or ‘read out’ response options. Participants are simply asked the question as Mike has reproduced it above.
The higher frequencies of mentions at various points throughout our trend data tend to correlate with key EU events, eg. debating the Euro, etc.
We have another question that IS prompted, and it asks about the most important issues people consider when deciding which party to vote for: http://www.ipsos-mori.com/polls/trends/importance-of-key-issues.shtml.
As you can see, there is some variation, but in Sept 07 (the last time it was asked), Europe ranked 14th out of a list of 16 issues total.
We follow the question up by asking which party is best on each of these issues: http://www.ipsos-mori.com/polls/trends/bpoki-europe.shtml. I do notice the 2007 data has been missed out of the first table on this page; I’ll make sure the relevant data goes up this morning.
I hope this helps answer some of your queries!
Cheers,
Julia Clark
Head of Political Research
Ipsos MORI Social Research Institute
All I can say is that Nick Clegg’s defection to the tories last summer has worked out better than we could have imagined. To engineer a ridiculous split on an issue that should unite the party can only have been achieved as part of a covert operation
- the alternative is that the LDs have elected a leader who really lives up to his nickname. Poor Chris ‘Cassandra’ Huhne
The EU continues to attract much intense debate: I’m genuinely impressed by the length and the arguments contained in many of the posts today. Some people care a lot.
I used to be a strong supporter of the EU, bu it’s been around for over 50 years, and times change. Specifically, new alliances are needed from time-to-time, and old ones need to be de-emphasised.
The UK needs improved relations with developing large economies, notably Russia, China, Brazil, India. (I see Russia is restricting gas supplies again to the Ukraine). New and innovative thinking on this is badly needed to help this country progress in the 21st century.
Giving much consideration to the details of the operation of the EU (as contained in the Lisbon Treaty) isn’t a priority today, and the treaty should be ditched.
31. Whenever I get worried that Davey C is not doing enough to secure a majority in 2010 I am comforted by this sort of complacent drivel.
There remains a delusional sense of entitlement among Nulabour and their Guardianista Broonnosers.
They just don’t understand or believe that the majority of voters have really turned against them.
They thinks its the fault of the way pollsters ask questions or the media or ‘racists’ or a ‘right-wing conspiracy’ or ‘Global’ factors or mid-term blues.
You will notice that they never ever think its their own fault or doubt for one second that they are whiter than whiter and entirely in the right on every issue.
In this context the vote yesterday was not critical on its own and speaking personally there are many more important issues.
However Brown’s strategy plays entirely to the narrative of him as an unprincipled coward who simply cannot be trusted. Coupled with a positive Conservative alternative it is this narrative that has a chance of delivering a Conservative majority.
And we wondered how Sean managed to fill his new book with words in such a short time…
Sean I am a Euro Sceptic, but also a Westminster Sceptic a Leicestershire County and Harborough District Council Sceptic. Even Lutterworth Town Council does some silly things.
I want an ever closer union with as much power devolved as far down the line as possible so that local people could live their lives as they want within a safe and secure structure that cares about the world as a whole rather than petty European continentalism.
Just amazes me that so much time and effort is spent on something so esoteric, that it doesn’t even register on the Richter scale.
Moaning about the EU is like moaning about the weather, we all do it, we all enjoy it, but its pointless.
28
Annette Brooke looking at the Tory PPC, she’s got it by default.
Interesting poll, Labour higher than at the GE: yeah ok!
42 tpfkar yes it is the “localism” as in agree with whatever the local group wants.
The LD party then becomes just a flag of convenience and splits are inevitable.
25% is a massive split.
43.
“Q:Which three of the 50 new areas of qualified majority voting do you think will be politically important in 2009? (can you name any?)”
Answer: Can you name any? Do you actually know what is in the treaty you are trying to sell to us? Why doesn’t the government just tell us straight what these 50 new areas are, so we all know? So. Please list these 50 new areas. All 50. Seeing as you are so keen on the Treaty you must know what’s in it. Right?
“Q:What executive powers will the permanant president of the European Council have (A: None)”
A: The exact powers of the new president HAVE YET TO BE DEFINED. In signing the treaty we are potentially signing a blank cheque.
“Q:What executive powers will the foreign policy representative have (A: None)”
A: The new EU foreign minister will have the power to make foreign policy initiatives; indeed, under the treaty, some foreign and defense policies become subject, for the first time, to qualified majority voting.
Apart from that, good questions.
49. pretty much yes, but it has shown up a few splits in the lib dems, and that the tories have been able to keep their lot in line. It’s also given the tories plenty of ammo to use against the government for other issues, all in all a good outcome for the tories.
The proverbial chap on the Clapham omnibus recognises better than most that on a day to day basis the EU barely touches his life, and judges accordingly. In particular it is recognised that governments do the same stuff anyway, whoever they are
i think using the argument that the survey means no one cares is wrong . Europe affects most of the issues at the top of the list in some way or other
I think most people think it is important to live with a parliamentary democracy and would be very concerned if this was taken away - but it is not in your list anywhere - so why bother having parliament at all - no one cares - we should just move to government by opinion poll
Brown is getting a very easy ride in the Mail from his mate Dacre.
http://tinyurl.com/267hz5
They even have a go at the Tories. They do not criticise Brown by name.
“As for the Tories, most deserve credit at least for keeping their pledge and voting for a referendum. But, oh, what a half-hearted campaign they ran to persuade wavering MPs to back them. As every opinion poll shows, there is huge support for a referendum. Yet the Tories totally failed to exploit it, while ducking the question of whether a Conservative government would call a national vote after the treaty has been ratified. ”
Amazing stuff. Just shows what a good idea it is of Brown’s to keep Dacre dangling for his knighthood.
50 - I think there’s a bit more to localism than doing what the local party wants! But when setting national policy, there does have to be collective responsibility; hence the resignations of the rebels. I agree that 25% is a very large rebellion - and did so in my original post at 22. Had the Labour rebellion been on that scale we would have a referendum.
Somewhat O/T apologies.
Is Ken “a dead man walking?”
Last night at a question and answer session in Richmond, south-west London, Mr Livingstone criticised the Evening Standard and said he had faith Mr Jasper could be reappointed at a later date.
“I think it has been an absolutely disgraceful campaign,” he said.
“I would bet my own life that they will clear Lee Jasper and I will reappoint him when they do.”
49 Labour one point down on last month - yeah way to go!
Never write Ken off.
Its a bit like the old East Germany out there in London.
Members of the Livingstone Stasi are everywhere.
Beware vote against him and your borough could be returned to year Zero…
Ken raises the ghost of Guppy
http://broganblog.dailymail.co.uk/
49. the rest of the mail lays into labour and brown continually, goes a bit too far sometimes. Hague proved yet again why he is so much better than his labour counterpart, or any labour MP really. He slapped down several hecklers and insulted the lib dems rather well.
55. No. What is actually happening is that Dacre is keeping both Cameron and Brown dangling for the Mail’s support. That increases his paper’s politica leverage.
At the election I expect the Mail will come down on the Tory side, quite emphatically, and one of the reasons will be Europe.
But Dacre will then expect to see action v Brussels as a payback.
My suggestion that you were running an anthropological experiment with this thread was supposed to be tongue in cheek but after seeing Julia’s post at 44. I think It might have been more prescient than I thought.
Everyone knows this site is overwhelmingly Tory but not that the Tories on here are infact a tiny sub specie of that genus. Let’s call them Super Obsessivus Euosceticus. That this subject ranks 14th out of 16th with most voters tells you how unrepresentative those Tories posting on this site really are.
60. i dont know anything about that, why is the blog dismissing it as desperate, been done before?
43 As there is a 5 year transition probably very little immediate impact in 2009.
There is a pretty good review of the Lisbon treaty by SeanT’s favourite LD MEP, which is informative. Obviously as a publication of the Alliance of Liberals & Democrats in Europe is not designed as a guide for Eurosceptics but its a reasonable guide (though unfortunately there is a bit too mach jargon). Also perhaps Mr Duff’s euro fervour means he doesn’t recognise that certain phrases grate
“In all those cases, other states are propelled forward into enhanced cooperation” - propelled forward = pushed?
http://www.alde.eu/fileadmin/files/Download/True-Guide-NEW.pdf
64 - It’s desperate because this story is probably 15-20 years old. Go and ask anyone about Darius Guppy and see how many people even know who he is.
If you asked “Do you want to restrict immigration?” instead of “Do you are about the EU?” you would get a totally different result.
Tet they are effectively the same question.
N’est-ce pas?
One problem with these polls is that they look at factors individually. Some issues need to be grouped together and then what seems insignificant could be important. For instance if the EU is partly blamed for some of the issues surrounding immigration or economic policy, it still might not show up as important on the list. Also, it gets enmeshed in the whole issue of trust, divided parties and democratic accountability.
These lists have their use, but there is still an art in politics, an ability to see how issues are connected and to understand the meaning behind the bare words. Cameron has impressed me with his short-term handling of the Lisbon Treaty, using it to illustrate wider grievances against the government. Brown is playing a longer game and might still be successful in exploiting Tory splits in the coming years. Clegg, callow youth, has been a disaster, achieving the seemingly impossible task of engineering a LibDem split on an EU issue.
One thing about Calamity’s catastrophe we haven’t mentioned is that youth, seen as an excellent attribute (Cameron, Obama, then Clegg after Ming the Merciless) is very much a double-edged sword. Someone more experienced, and less stupid, would not’ve made such a total hash and somehow managed to split a party that’s entirely EU-phile.
65. ta very much, he is getting desperate. The labour party slagging off boris at the weekend sounded desperate enough.
OT 1 I am in London 2-3 days a week. It is not the impact of the ES newspaper that will hit Ken, more all the billboards each newstand has - which are effectively a negative campaign for Boris and seen by everyone
OT 2 never underestimate Bill & Hill, there ability to fight back is astonishing and proven. The Presidential race is a long haul and the Clintons are robust - is BO? I thought Hillary looked in top form in Ohio.
Anyone know where the list of MP’s who voted for and against is (he offical one not one from a newspaper)
69
Just 4u cuddles!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darius_Guppy
I don’t believe livingstone’s attack on Boris was at all ‘desperate’. I happen to think that he’s the smartest PR operator in politics and that he knows that now is the time to keep his powder dry.
These ‘Guppy’ type skirmishes are neither here nor there. He knows that a three week blitz just before the election is the way to do it. I’m looking forward to seeing what he has in store. Anyone who could demolish Labour at the height of Blair’s popularity and monster Thatcher at the height of her’s should not be underestimated.
Whatever the ES does bet against him at your peril!
Chaps:
Just got my Tory party polling card for the London EP list, but don’t really know the candidates.
Anyone here tell me who the Europhile traitors and lazy hangers-on are so I can put them at the bottom of the list?
73. Are you steaming in at the current price then Roger?
40
I wholeheartedly agree with mike S.
You are a great poster whom I enjoy reading.
Until you start on about the EU.
You rant - there is no other description for it. Ranting is the perogative of all citizens but few take it up. those few include Ian Paisley, Farage, David Hatton , and others of a simialr outlook.
I gave up reading rants.. on the same subject. they are repetetive an dboring.
I actually find myself in agreement with Nick Palmer - on this .
Ranting is counterproductive: in the end no-one reads.
Rant: An opinion that the reader finds particularly disagreeable because of his own cognitive dissonance.
62
Surely Glover is speaking for the Mail on its attitude to Cameron?
http://tinyurl.com/2mvszz
74. Mr Palmer should be able to give you a review of Bob Seely who is on the list.
As the EU isn’t likely to burgle my house, curse me with ill health, blight our children with illiteracy and so on, of course skools’n'ospitals ranks higher.
To suggest that it therefore doesn’t matter is a staggeringly illogical deduction, however. And to be frank, an insult.
I have never felt more disillusioned with politics than I do this morning. Reading the papers - the Mirror unsure whether to gloat or lie and ultimately doing both, the Mail shrieking to the already-converted, the Telegraph bleakly saddened, bceause the Government tells lies AND KNOWS IT CAN GET AWAY IT, I wonder if it’s worth it.
If the Government can be elected saying it will do things, and then once we’ve voted for them, does the precise opposite, well, it’s a big exciting world out there and maybe I should spend more time in it.
That’s a shame, because I’m only 26 - I’ve been interested in politics since I was 14, from a youthful socialist - weren’t we all? - to a right-wing libertarian, a journey I thoroughly enjoyed making, some of it as a semi-lurker on here. I had looked forward to many more years of keen interest, following the ebbs and flows, enjoying the debates, striking some bets, and so on.
But now I feel faintly repulsed by it all. I know politics was never this clean, honourable profession we imagine it to have been in days gone by, but this really feels like a squalid new low.
To feel suddenly cut off for a long-term interest is not a happy feeling. And all because a handful of very well paid people couldn’t keep their promises.
What a shame.
So voting reform,PR & all that good stuff doesn’t even make it on the list of voters concerns.
So no more discussion or parliamentary time on that,clearly nobody is interested and very happy with the current voting system.
73. I am going to resist being rude…but its very difficult…
..nothing Livingstone has done this year demonstrates any sort of coherent or smart strategy..just look at how he managed to drag out the bad publicity around Lee Grasper….He is a has been.. but your comments demonstrates once again welcome complacency from the Guardianistas..
Were you also telling everyone pre-September 07 that Brooon was a great political strategist..I bet you were…
Rant definition above - should it should include a reference to repetition and length of posts surely.
72. ta, that is desperate. trying to tie boris to something that happened in the early 90’s is like tyring to tie livingstone to something he did in the 80’s.
73. Roger has spoken - double up on Boris now.
73. each of those times it was livingstone v the establishment, now he’s part of it, and a very unpopular one too.
“A rant or harangue is a speech or text that does not present a well-researched and calm argument; rather, it is typically an attack on an idea, a person or an institution, and very often lacks proven claims. Such attacks are usually personal attacks. Compare with a dialectic.
In some cases, rants are based on facts and concrete information, but the key ideas expressed are what the individual personally feels.
However, some rants are used not to attack something, but to defend an individual, idea or organization. Rants of this type generally occur after the subject has been attacked by another individual or group”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rant
74. Martin - same problem here!
ConHome posed a series of questions to the candidates the other day (Sunday?) that would be worth going back and reading for some hints.
I personally like the look of the JP Floru chap - moving to the UK to escape Brussels, now going back to defend his adopted home… but of course, that may just be a canny political operative at work. They all seem like decent sorts (sceptics, but not Better Off Outers)from the booklet!
Sorry to go off topic, but was anyone else incensed by the arrant nonsense (or lies) peddled by the Home Secretary this morning when she said that the national ID database was not going to be on-line so was immune from hacking. How does the stupid woman think the system is going to work? Does she imagine that a government office is going to ring up a hotline and describe the appearance of the person standing in front of them and what their fingerprint or iris looks like so the other department can check the register. The woman is not fit for office.
Even worse - yet again - Jim Naughtie let her get away with it.
80 - I’m in a similar position although I would counsel one thing, don’t give them the satisfaction of putting you off. Keep in there! Throw yourself in with renewed vigour. Be counter-intuitive. It works more often than you think!!
It is not just the fact thast europe is incredibly tedious, bureuacrats, diplomats and sprouts, irrelevant to most peoples lives but moreover it is a given, an inmoveable feast.
Tories may bleat and bluster but if in Govt they would have found a way to avoid a vote, unless of course they knew they could win it, like Ireland. Unthinakbale that the Lisbon treaty could be sunk by a vote in another country dominated by anything but the arguments.
This Europe debate shows politics at its very worse. Politicking about nothing of relevance, nothing anyone can do anything about anyhow, and people spouting emotive drivel.
The tone of the debate by the Eurosceptics here is just pathetic vomiting words like scum, treachery bla bla. You all must suffer from some kind of disorder that blinds you to the real world.
OB’s betfair price going up and up - can people not do simple arithmetic ?
Europe’s importance to the electorate can be demonstrated by the fact that over the last three elections substantial numbers of people have voted for single-issue anti-European parties. (Not sure of the exact figures - about 3%?) Now, 3% doesn’t sound a lot, but when you consider that prior to 1997 we had no real history of single-issue parties getting anywhere, it is really rather impressive: this is the one single-issue which has been more electorally significant than any other since the war. The British, as a whole - partly as a result of our electoral system perhaps - tend largely to stick to the larger parties; the acheivments of UKIP and the like in, well, maybe not breaking this mold, but certainly denting it should not be taken too lightly.
In fact, this century, UKIP have substantially outpolled the Green Party. Electorally, we might conclude that Europe matters more to the British than the environment.
73. ‘Monster Thatcher at the height of her popularity’? the result being that the whole shebang that was the GLC was downgraded and removed? Yeah! smart move, Ken! some strategist, a lemming would be preferable.
76. I think you must confuse me with a similarly named person, who actually gives a flying f*** what you think, you halfwit.
91, two out of three parties break their manifesto pledges and those who point this out are at fault? What a fascinating concept of logic you possess.
78. I havent ever read the mail but my parents and elderly relatives do…they are are all Conservatives and huff and puff about Cameron moving to the left but one thing they certainly will not be doing is voting for Broon or the Labdems…Hitchens/Heffer and the rest ‘rant’ away but they arent going to turn the blue rinsers red… the only possible negative relevance to these articles is to get a a very small number of oldies to vote UKIP or BNP..nothing of any real import..
On a positive front, the fact that rabid right wingers dont like Dave actually helps his project…
94. I found that remark baffling too, but as Roger said it, I didn’t spend too much time worrying what on earth it meant.
BTW - does anyone have a link to anything telling me who rebelled last night?
91. as a eurosceptic myself I find it entertaining that the only way you seem to be able to argue against the position is insult the intelligence of the people who hold it, rather than come up with the alternative viewpoint. Many people on here do, you just attack the people you don’t like.
re 11 but Stephen pb.com is suprisingly a 24 hour community. I often wonder when some regulars get any sleep.
80 Stick with it, kiddo. Sometimes it isn’t the lies they tell, so much as the truth, that keeps the motivation going. Do you really want Kinnock to win, when he says his aim for the Conservatives is to “grind the bastards into the dust”? Just think of Kinnock’s grimace when Cameron stands, waving on the doorstep, before heading into Number 10 as PM… That should be motivation enough for most…
— The 29 Labour MPs who backed the Tory call for a referendum: Colin Burgon (Elmet), Ronnie Campbell (Blyth Valley), Frank Cook (Stockton North), Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North), John Cummings (Easington), Ian Davidson (Glasgow South West), David Drew (Stroud), Gwyneth Dunwoody (Crewe & Nantwich), Frank Field (Birkenhead), Mark Fisher (Stoke-on-Trent Central), Roger Godsiff (Birmingham Sparkbrook & Small Heath), Kate Hoey (Vauxhall), Kelvin Hopkins (Luton North), Lindsay Hoyle (Chorley), Lynne Jones (Birmingham Selly Oak), John McDonnell (Hayes & Harlington), David Marshall (Glasgow East), Austin Mitchell (Great Grimsby), Anne Moffat (East Lothian), George Mudie (Leeds East), Denis Murphy (Wansbeck), Alan Simpson (Nottingham South), Dennis Skinner (Bolsover), Graham Stringer (Manchester Blackley), Gisela Stuart (Birmingham Edgbaston), David Taylor (Leicestershire North West), Paul Truswell (Pudsey), Robert Wareing (Liverpool West Derby), Mike Wood (Batley & Spen)
— A total of 13 Liberal Democrats also voted for a referendum: Annette Brooke (Dorset Mid & Poole North), Alistair Carmichael (Orkney & Shetland), Tim Farron (Westmorland & Lonsdale), Andrew George (St Ives), Sandra Gidley (Romsey), Mike Hancock (Portsmouth South), David Heath (Somerton & Frome), John Hemming (Birmingham Yardley), Paul Holmes (Chesterfield), Martin Horwood (Cheltenham), Greg Mulholland (Leeds North West), John Pugh (Southport), Richard Younger-Ross (Teignbridge)
re 57 Ken on Any Questions on Friday night
103. All but perhaps two of the Lib Dems there are sitting for marginal seats. St.Ives may not be quite as safe as it appears, either.
71&99Woody&Cookie, Andrea posted the relevant links to the breakdown of the voting by MP’s last night @356 on the previous thread.
80.Andy D, agree with your sentiments. I suspect that there will be some cross party consensus on this view from politically active people in all the parties today.
105 - Which explains their decision to rebel, however I think that it won’t actually save them in the main.
100
As opposed to u Eurosceptics, who are ’so polite’ see 95
re 103 wow - Birmingham seems to be a hot bed of Euro-scepticism.
You can see the long term trends - since 1974 - of Mori’s “most important issues” responses here. COM is the code for all EU related stuff
http://www.ipsos-mori.com/polls/trends/issues.shtml
100- I am not insulting your intelligence just saying that yuo are blind to the real world.
96- a manifesto pledged was made at the time when most countries were voting on the constitution. Now it is only Ireland where a yes vote is guarenteed.
If the Tories were in Govt they would not have a vote (see Mastricht)- they are just playing the politics of opposition much like Labour di9d with Mastricht.
108. oh no, I’m not saying all eurosceptics are polite, or all europhiles arent, just pompous people like tysons constant stream of condescension over the subject doesnt help the europhile cause much.
73
Just received my first piece of election literature.
Apparently during Livingstone’s 8 years the annual GLA charge has more than doubled.With Lee Jaspar giving our money away to his mates that’s not surprising.
Massive overseas foreign travel bills at the GLA but details not been released yet,surely can’t be true based on all that green stuff that we keep hearing from Livingstone?
Probably a little more relevant to the voters of London than Guppy whoever or who monstered who according to the Roger version of history.
111. I’m not thick, just blind, thanks for that, the difference is staggering.
111 - “Now it is only Ireland where a yes vote is guarenteed.”
The only reason a ‘yes’ vote is guaranteed in Ireland is because they will be asked to vote again and again until they evenutally give the right answer - ‘yes’.
107. I certainly hope not. I suspect none of these characters would have voted for a referendum if they weren’t worried about their jobs. That makes them even less respectable than the ‘out’ Europhiles. They deserve to lose their seats.
110 Interesting that “the economy” has very recently jumped as an issue - at around twice the levels seen during the 2005 election. Given the worries about economy are only going to represent one-way traffic, I will be curious to see whether this number is running ahead of a Labour poll slide. It certainly doesn’t sit logically with today’s poll numbers.
111
Absolutely right! both the main parties have played the Eurocard when in opposition. Then when in government, its quietly put on the back burner, and its ‘We belong in the heart of Europe’ then.
Labour (particularly the left) in the seventies, the Tories,(took us in, kept us in, took us further in) since ‘97.
You sound just a bit cynical, Harry…..
I thought Tories were supposed to be the party of hope and sunshine…..
@118:
The Tories used to believe that, but not now. If Dave tried to put his government at the heart of Europe, the parliamentary party would tear him a second anus.
Tory Europhilia is dead.
The Europhiles’ perfect EU referendum ballot paper might look like this…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Stimzettel-Anschluss.jpg
Ken is desparate. Bit like Brown lying at PMQs yesterday about Boris wanting to cut police numbers. Boris raised it as a point of order at PMQs a couple of weeks ago that Brown has misrepresented him.
117.
Its the economy that will do for Nu Lab.
http://www.order-order.com/2008/03/myth-of-uk-economic-strength.html
To remain on-topic, an interesting comparison is with the foxhunting issue. For most people this issue has meant and means very little. But for some - no more than 20-30% of the population? at most? - it means a lot (and that minority included some MPs - like Nick Palmer).
For these people - on either side - foxhunting is very important. A question of deep morality. Something felt very intensely.
Of those 30% probably a quarter are very pro foxhunting and the other three quarters very anti hunting. The general public is largely uninterested, and are turned off by the vehemence and anger of the debate on both sides; however the public, if forced to side, generally agrees with the antihunting lobby.
I doubt if at any point foxhunting has been named as the number 1 issue by more than a few percent, if that.
Yet when Labour came into power it felt dutybound to honour its manifesto commitment (those were the days!) and to accede to the burning desires of an important chunk of its membership.
They banned foxhunting, causing huge anger, a massive march and riots outside parliament.
Europe is precisely the same. For us sceptics it is a deep and very serious moral issue. We are largely supported by the public, but only in a mild way - and they get turned off and bored by the debate in general.
In the end though Cameron will have to do what Blair did. He will have to honour his manifesto and please his activist base: he will therefore move Britain to a semidetached position in the EU, with a referendum lock on further integration.
Others will look on and wonder: why all the fuss. As the rest of us did with hunting. But that’s politics.
Mike it’s about trust, honesty, keeping your word and competence - those are the big issues of the moment in the public’s mind.
On the other hand, it is actually quite an important issue and it’s before Parliament. Of course they’re talking about it!
@121:
Chortle. I mean, Godwin’s Law, and all that. But still, chortle.
124. Yes but more people hunt now than before the ban - so Labour wasted time and effort for no effect only headlines.
124 - “In the end though Cameron will have to do what Blair did. He will have to honour his manifesto and please his activist base: he will therefore move Britain to a semidetached position in the EU, with a referendum lock on further integration.”
You really believe that?
@125:
Quite. The Clucking Fist and the Cleggnut have both behaved thoroughly dishonourably, and have taken British people’s contempt for their politicians even further than I would have thought possible.
Let’s hope that The Sun’s claim that they will make Brown pay for this is a promise, not a threat.
120
Arse!! The Tories if they get back, (its still if) will be so bloody grateful Dave will be able to sell ‘em anything.
What (of any substance) is Cameron actually going to do about Europe? Take the UK out? NO! so what the f**k is the gripe, he’s not going to do anything, nothing at all.
What is it Heffer calls Cameron and Osborne a couple of PR conmen: yep I’ll go for that.
I see our own pet socialist, Nick Palmer, turned out to be a treacherous little coward and lickspittle after all. Quelle surprise.
130. Heffers judgement over Cameron and Osborne is skewed at best. He’s hated Cameron since he became leader, and whatever happens (even if he got a landslide majority) Heffer would still slag him off. He’d rather have someone like john redwood in charge, a staunch old school tory, and completely unelectable.
127. Yes yes but remember it’s not important whether policies work, only what kind of PR they generate. That’s what New Labour is all about.
Two quick points.
MORI’s table is not filtered for likelihood to vote; I would suggest voters who care about Europe are pretty keen to vote.
The table does not include an issue that has steadily risen up the political agenda since the early nineties; trust in politics, politicians and political institutions.
[131] This is exactly the kind of comment that is turning me and others off this site- please withdraw it immediately.
130
Heffer has never had to run anything and is just a bitter old man. He rants as well.:-)
135. The tone may be unpleasant but the poster is factually correct.
@130:
Here’s some things we could do:
Hold a two question referendum on (1) EU membership, and (2) substantial repatriation of powers, including a reserved powers constitution that guarantees these powers as British in perpetuity.
Powers that should be returned exclusively to the UK must include:
Agriculture
Fisheries
Environment
Immigration and Asylum
Workers’ rights.
We’d also want legislation to tightly regulate and specifically limit the EU’s ability to interfere in:
Foreign and security policy
Justice and home affairs.
Defence (which will remain with NATO).
Ideally, we’d also campaign to have the commission abolished, and for the council to take over its day-to-day activities.
I took this from Wikipedia. It helps explain why ultimately Ken became Mayor of London and why Thatcher’s popularity sank so low that her own party booted her out…….
Livingstone soon became a thorn in the side of the sitting Conservative government. He deliberately antagonised Thatcher through a series of actions (including posting a billboard of London’s rising unemployment figures on the side of County Hall, directly opposite Parliament), reducing London Underground and bus fares using government subsidies, entering into dialogue with Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams at a time when Adams was banned from entering Britain due to his links with the Provisional Irish Republican Army, and endorsing a statue of Nelson Mandela while Thatcher regarded the future South African president as a terrorist.
How many “pledges” in the last Tory manifesto has Cameron decided were not such a good idea after all?
Unfortunately their manifesto is mainly full of platitudes - cleaner hospitals, better schools but they do pledge on page 9 - No university fees.
So Conservative break manifesto pledges too.
RE: This thread – RED RAG TO A BULL!!!
What I find so amusingly ironic about it is the way Europhile posters claim no-one cares, claim its boring, claim its irrelevant, claim its immaterial, whilst they clearly deeply care about the European project itself.
How important would you rank the EU on your list Mike?
After all, one of the four key reasons you are on the record as stating you wouldn’t vote Conservative, is because they need to “get real on Europe”.
Hmm…. “Get real on Europe”.
I don’t know what you mean by “Get real on Europe”, but I can guess. And clearly you think it is a *very* important issue. One sufficient enough to determine how you’d vote.
I wonder how much you’d be playing this “its boring” card if the tables were turned. Imagine Labour and the Lib-Dems were in opposition and you both were proposing a referendum on a Conservative Bill aiming to repatriate powers to Britain, which opinion polls showed was very unpopular and you’d win?? (heaven forbid!)
Would you be all over the blogsophere saying “its boring” then? Would you be shouting from the rooftops that “noone cares”? Would you just sit back in your armchair yawning about how irrelevant and stupid it all is?
I wonder…
This is just another Europhile tactic.
The Europhile tactic used to be to smear opponents with labels like “Nutjob”, “Xenophobe”, “Stupid”, “Regressive Idiot” etc. etc. Some people like Wodger still use it.
But that didn’t worked.
So, now you have a new tactic. The new tactic is to claim “its boring” and to try and subdue any interest in the issue by making it as painfully dull as possible. Then you win by default.
And, it’s worked… this time.
But it is disingenuous, it is transparently dishonest and it is feeble. No matter how many times you repeat it here, no intelligent poster will never buy it.
Because it *is* important, we all *know* it’s important, we all *know* it is critical to the governance of Britain and, one way or the other, we *all* have a strong opinion of it. All of us.
And it is only a matter of time before the British people demand their rightful say.
You may have ‘won’ this battle, but, as SeanT says, you will lose the war.
140. they arent in government, so holding to those pledges is…well, impossible. however the pledge over the referendum was given by every party in the house, and was something that the tories could get through.
“Whatever the ES does bet against him at your peril!
by Roger March 6th, 2008 at 9:33 am”
So Boris for Mayor it is then!
135 - There’s a first time for everything but I agree. Mr Coxall seems to be pretty juvenile!
135. Your recent posts have also been full of intemperate and insulting language. Perhaps you might want to try cutting it out yourself before pompously demanding that others do so.
What about rights of EU citizens to come and work here?
If that is not allowed will UK citizens be stopped from working/living in EU countries?
130. Surprisingly, you really do seem to put great faith in the views of the rabid right..everyday you quote another anti-Dave piece from some source or another, usually hitchens or Heffer. I am not quite sure what your hoping to achieve, but given your other views views its probably anti-Conservative. As such, I am sure you would be the first to tell us that the views of right wing maniacs are not worth the paper they are printed on.
135. thats odd its your drivel that is turning me and others off..
111, 118 - possibly. But I would be just as furious with the Tories were they trying to dragoon us deeper into Europe in this way. In fact, it was Maastricht - and the arrogant way that the Conservatives refused to consider listening to the electorate before handing over agreat chunk of our soverignty to Europe - that a) cost them my vote in 1997 (I bet the Tory candidate in Darlington was gutted about that) and b) considerably hardened my Euroscepticism.
123 - Apart from the fact that the level of the stock market at any particular moment in time is quite plainly a poor proxy for the real economy, the fact that there is no attempt to adjust for interest rates, and no account is taken of dividends, Mr Staines also appears to have forgotten that Labour came to power in May 1997. If he was going to carry out his worthless exercise, he might at least have chosen the level of the stockmarket when Labour came to power - but if course that would show a 20% rise which doesn’t fit in with the typically vacuous point he is trying to make.
@144:
Insult me if it will make you feel better. Doesn’t excuse what Palmer did. When he turns up today, we should all remember what it is that he has done.
Is it safe to come out and play…….
The dust has settled from the primaries on Tuesday and Hillary ended up the night +4 overall. In the end she appears to have lost Texas by 7 delegates :
Ohio - Clinton +9
Rhode Island - Clinton +5
Vermont - Obama +3
Texas Primary - Clinton +2
Texas Caucus - Obama +9 (provisional)
[137] The tone is worse than unpleasant. The boorish ranting over the last few days has been bl%%dy awful. What ever point people are making is lost in a red mist. Regular posters are drowned out by a bunch of nutcases with unbeleivably bad manners. This kind of name calling has got to stop. This site has been pretty good at policing bad behaviour, but these anti-Euro trolls are now undermining the best thing about pb.com- the civilised debate between people who have different points of view.
Sneering, hectoring insults are not a debating tactic, they add nothing, except to show just how “angry” people are. Well, guys, a lot of people have pretty strong opinions here- and if you can not nmake your point without resorting to insult (even if you think that “its OK, becuse its true”) then please will you shut up.
151. close then, but this doesnt show HC is on a massive comeback trail. If Obama can’t forge ahead then he’ll be in trouble, but as it stands things are pretty much the same as before.
152. it’s not just anti-euro posters being nasty, pro-euros have been getting just as personal and nasty at every available opportunity.
151. Which she should give back and more in Wyoming and Mississippi in the next week.
Yet read the beeb or CNN website and she’s back in the hunt - the lack of understanding of the arithmetic by the media is laughable.
130
Quite a wish list, tell me do you still put your teeth under the pillow?
I’ve been here before, often!
Back in the ’70’s (before most of u lot were born) I argued against going in, when the Labour Party held the referendum,(strongly opposed by the Conservatives) on whether we should remain in, I voted to come out.
Now the idea given by Tories that the EU is different to the EEC is nonsense. This is what Heath said at the time:-
House of Commons 10 June 1971.
We have said that as members of the enlarged Community we would play our full part in the progress towards economic and monetary union.
Hmmmm strange! not a single member of the then cabinet resigned over that statement.
Oh! seant always says when I bring this up, I’m boring, well facts are boring, doesn’t stop them being facts.
Now the reason the EU isn’t an issue is ‘cos every one knows its just politics, thats all, just politics.
151 - I’ll guard your rear
Martin Coxall. Most posters who are as rude as you try to water it down with a little wit.
155. i was thinking that, the BBC was going on about how she’s back, but people on here were posting the results, and things seemed pretty much the same as before.
150 - The Member for Broxtowe has only excercised his vote in the manner he saw fit in Parliament. You may disagree with the way he exercised it, and I do, but as a sitting Member he has a right to exercise his vote as he wishes. This is still a parliamentary system, we have the right to express a view but we are in dangerous territory if we impugn the motives of those we disagree with simply because we disagree with them!
@152:
It’s difficult not to get angry when Labour filth have just committed an unforgivable act of treason, broken a solemn promise, treated us like idiots, debased democracy and sold the country down the river.
Now, you might not think that’s worth being angry about, but that clearly marks you out as ‘one of them’ and to be treated with equal contempt, surely?
@158:
If I were to water it down, there’s a danger you might not think I meant it.
@160:
Except, of course, he was elected on a SOLEMN PROMISE to do the exact opposite. Clearly a Labour politician’s word and an empty bag are worth the bag.
153 cuddles. Obama doen’t need to forge ahead. Just keep racking up the elected delegates, keep well ahead, diminish Hillary’s super delegate lead, let the cash pour in and run the clock down.
164. 1.35- 1.39 avail on betfair this morning for OB. Two states he should walk in next few days then nothing until April. Seems like only one way the price will go ?
Why are ‘race relations’ and ‘immigration’ conflated in the survey?
‘Sneering, hectoring insults are not a debating tactic, they add nothing, except to show just how “angry” people are’
Yes, so why do you resort to them so often, then? Just look at your own posts for a change.
157 John O. I’m never happier on PB than with you up my rear.
155 Harry. Indeed, but it doesn’t match the media narrative.
Martin if you behave like an idiot, you must expect to be treated like one.
The charge of Treason is just ridiculous, a manifesto is not “a solemn promise” -it was 3 years ago, for Gogs sake, things change. Existing democracy in the UK would disgrace a banana republic (High Court Judge) and sold the country down the river is just daft.
Get over it.
163 - And if people care enough in his constituency they will have an opportunity to make their view known at the next election. Using highly intemperate language, being indescribably rude and disrespectful diminishes you more than it does Mr Palmer.
153) Obama doesn’t need to “forge ahead” he just need to protect his lead in pledged delegates. Aside from the polls (which will now doubt show improvement for HRC) The electoral narrative will be;
1) Texas Caucus results -in the coming days - What will the headlines be? (we’ve seen some already) “Obama gains lost ground” “Obama wins Texas Caucus”
2) Wyoming - March 8th (projected Obama win) headline “Obama wins Wyoming, increases delegate lead”
3) Mississippi March 11th - “Landslide victory for Obama in Mississppi”
I predict Obama’s national standing in polls to improve around these victories. Its a long wait unitl Pennsylvania for Obama layers..
Lib dems;
John Hemming has the Lib Dem ref voter list;
http://johnhemming.blogspot.com/2008/03/lib-dem-votes-on-referendum.html
….talking of a little wit…..JohnO on cue! Could you show Martin Coxall how to make his point without appearing to be a six year old with Tourette’s syndrome?
[135] [154] [161] Enough is enough. Please can ALL posters (myself included, if you think I am just as guilty) moderate themselves, so that we can return to the usual high standard of robust and strong minded debate, rather than the kids in a playground stuff that we have had to endure recently. It may be pompous, but without some basic level of mutual respect then this site becomes a Vote2005 fiasco. I enjoy debating with Sean Fear, Benedict White (who I beleive has a blog ;-)), John O and the other Conservatives and indeed Nick Palmer and Hopi Sen and Roger for Labour, whose views on many things, not just the EU, are different from my own. It is just no fun- for anyone- to come on here and be vilified and insulted by boorish trolls.
172 - “Little wit”
Enough of the sizeism if you don’t mind. Not my fault being a demented leprechaun!
Er, think I may have to pass on that one…
89, Chris A — no, you’re not the only one!
I wonder what airport staff and students will make of being forced to be guinea pigs for Labour’s illiberal, unworkable, unnecessary and obscenely expensive ID card scheme?
172. Can someone please show Roger how to make a point without appearing like a pompous, condescending 90-year-old with Alzheimer’s?
Oops, I forgot, he actually IS a pompous, condescending 90-year-old with Alzheimer’s.
Sorry Rog!
173. I look forward to seeing you engage in debate on this issue rather than referring to people with an alternative view to yourself as ‘idiots’, ‘trolls’, ‘ignorant’ - and worse - as you have in recent days.
But by the look of your last sentence, it isn’t going to happen, is it?
Actually I don’t think you want a debate at all on EU-related issues - you are 100% convinced that your view is the only valid one and that other views can be properly dismissed as ‘ignorant’, ‘idiotic’ etc.
When people insist on expressing these other views, you blow a gasket and start insulting them. This has been a consistent pattern ever since I started reading this site.
164. fair enough, i just thought that if his campaign started losing steam he might get caught by HC, kind of like critical mass.
153 “as it stands things are pretty much the same as before.”
No, they are not the same. Some 38% of the possible delegates she needed to claw back have now been decided. To claw back, she now has to do 50% better in delegates than she had to do before Tuesday.
Oh, and her overwhelming superdelegate lead has now slipped to a mere 41, down a further 13 in the past week. So despite a great “comeback week” - she has still fallen behind in the overall delegate race.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pT_z8d3gptJ8U9nBteEAWXg
161 162 163, r u stressed, take a break.
On the notional subject of the thread, there does seem to be a strange kind of disconnect going on. On the one hand, the polls tell us no-one really seems to think Europe is important, apart from the lunatic fringe. As Mike has always said, no-one cares.
But the turnout & result IWAR got cuts directly across this. After this week, it’s impossible to say no-one cares.
Should this shake our confidence in polling on this issue? Or is it just symptomatic of the way polling can sometimes give consistently misleading answers? Are there broader lessons we can learn re: interpreting polls going forward?
179. I’m actually an obama supporter and was just worried clinton (who i feel has been incredibly negative and nasty) was catching up.
173. As noted by others your sensible suggestion is signifcantly undermined by what is essentially a partisan point. You seem to be attacking Conservatives. There have been unpleasant comments from all sides. You have been as guilty of self-regarding, self-righteous leftie pomposity as anyone (except maybe Roger but he is rarely if ever rude).
That said you are right and I shall certainly try and refrain from being rude myself..
176 Seant any chance of you going to Dublin to sink a few guiness and fight the good for the cause?
Hillary is 3.9 to be Democratic candidate 5.4 to be next President.(Betfair)
Barack is 1.35 to be Democratic candidate 2.26 to be next President.
Which of these bets should I take?
176. SeanT. To take writing advice from a second rate writer-not even second division but lower Conference league would not be a good idea.
I imagine why you spend so much of your time on here because you have fans which must make a nice change. I can only imagine they aren’t used to creative writing or they’d know that your level is somewhere near that of a junior copywriter in a half decent agency-but not as witty.
I have friends who write for a living and none have so far had to change their name in the hope of making a sale.
Thanks for the advice though.
184 - I could hardly think of a better way to boost the ‘yes’ campaign there.
I find this survey almost unbelieveable. 28% of people think the biggest issue we face is immigration/race relations and 21% say crime. I am absolutely shocked. These totally dwarf the figures for education. This is frightening and I wonder if it is really true.
Is there any kind of weighting system in this survey - given that immigration is an issue people may be quite quiet about. I think they may have over-weighted the survey.
186. Aw come on Roger, the only reason you post on here day after day is attention seeking too.
It’s not as if you sharing your predictable leftie prejudices and wildly inaccurate predictions with the rest of us adds anything to the debates - although it does give us all a good laugh.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2008/03/06/bcnpound106.xml
Sterling hitting new lows against the Euro. Not good. No matter who I have spoken to recently, whether US or European has pointed out the particular vulnerability of the UK: big property bubble, very reliant on financial services, poor regulation, high fiscal burden etc. etc.
Whoever wins the next election will be drinking from a pretty poisonous chalice…
188. I’m sure if you split it our it would be 28% immigration and 0% race relations.
182 I’m also an Obama supporter, but I’d like to think that I can put that aside in the interests of trying to post information on here helpful to our Betters - those who actually want to make money. There does seem to have been an awful lot of “Hillary is back - probabaly now even favourite” tosh spouted that runs counter to all the information availalble. It’s like people standing around shouting “there’s gold in them there hills!” versus those who are actually panning for the nuggets.
In a nutshell, Hillary supporters - your team is losing the Champions League semi-final - badly. The clock is running down; whereas it was 3-0 at halftime, it is now 4-1 with fifteen minutes to play. And you’ve played all your (superdelegate) substitutes in the first half; Obama still has a full bench.
Oh, and since half-time, several of your team are on yellow cards for foul play. You may have knocked some lumps out of team Obama, winded a few others - but they are still gamely running on. There is the odd chant from the Obama supporters, complaining that you should be sending some of her players home in an ambulance. But generally they are still singing - cuz they’re winning.
And the person enjoying the lump-knocking spectacle most is the coach of Real Madrid - the opponent in the final.
Your best hope is flood-light failure, the match gets abandoned - and you win when the game is replayed.
185: Lay Hillary for President, I’d say. It’s very hard to see her winning the nomination, and in the exceedingly unlikely event that she does (superdelegates + shenannigans) it involves an ugly foodfight that alienates Obama supporters, especially black Democrats, and makes it very hard for her to beat McCain.
185 - implied prices in the General are Obama 1.67, Clinton 1.38.
As you can see, that simply doesn’t make sense given the received wisdom that Obama is more electable v McCain (though recent polls have shown this gap narrowing).
You could leverage yourself a decent position by backing Obama or McCain to be President, and Clinton to be the Dem nominee which comes to a total book of about 106% but with a possibility of double payout. It’s all quite complicated, though.
How many Super Delegates are committed? How secure are commitments by Super Delegates? Are delegates selected for candidates who have now withdrawn, free to vote for either of the remaining candidates?
190. The outlook certainly seems bad. Still, a big shock may be what we need. This country desperately needs radical change (a revolution?) and being taken out of their complacency may do the British good.
Icarus - I agree with you about Europe. But how many others across the continent do?
184) Obama for Dem nom is about as good a value 1.35 as you’ll get. I think he’s be back below 1.2 after the world realises that he’s won Texas, Wyoming and Mississipi.
No doubt in April one should lay Obama him again as HRC is bound to repeat her “its all going fine” Ohio speech on the winner’s podium in Penn…
103 - Bob Wareing is no longer a Labour MP. So 28 rebels.
Hilary’s strategy now will be to try and make the super delegates fearful that this (in my opinion non-existant) wobble in these two important states would effect any Obama presidential challenge in the future. She’ll also probably keep attacking him personally, trying to tarnish the reputation he’s gained for being forward looking and not negative.
195 Have a look at the link I gave in post 179 - you will see that negative numbers show a superdelegate changing sides. They happen - but they have been from Hillary to Obama.
Talk of Obama’s fabled “fifty superdelegates” who were being held back has been damped down by the Obama camp. Maybe they were dependent upon Hillary losing the popular vote in Texas and/or Ohio - and her not agreeing to suspend her campaign. Anyway, Obama is in Washington DC today, rather than out on the stump in Wyoming or Mississippi - leading to suggestion that “summats up….”
The EU is low down on the voters list of priorities. We all know this. But what voters are concerned about is trust and truthfullness. When a party stands for election on a manifesto the public expect them to stick to that commitment and when they don’t the public take note.
We have a Prime Minister that has become Labour leader without a vote. Is going to run the country until 2010 without a vote. Who bottled calling an election in October. Has colluded with the Lib-Dem to deny people a referendum, thus breaking a key manifesto commitment. All of this matters and I think the public are well able to join the dots and see what this ghasty, cowardly socialist is doing. The useless Liberals have just made a drama out ot a crisis.
Oh yeah, and having read The Sun’s editorial today, I think its safe to assume Labour have blown any chance they ever had of getting Murdoch’s support in 2010. So, this will actgually turn out to be quite a pivitol moment in British politics.
163
Don’t get so worked up,in 8 weeks time 4 million Londoners get to vote and reward Brown & the Lib Dems for their efforts.
Ben Brogan on the ‘massive tory rebellion’ over the Lisbon treaty:
http://broganblog.dailymail.co.uk/2008/03/cameron-hit-by.html
This story tells you all you need to know about Clinton dirty fighting - NAFTA story was initially about Clinton, not Obama!
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080306.NAFTA06/TPStory/National
102 - true, but perhaps I always wanted politics to be not solely about detesting the other side. Although I do now, and hate’s not a great feeling to carry around all the time. Cheers for the encouragement though.
Maybe I’m just sulking because I was so looking forward to a fair fight on this issue at long last, and now that’s been taken away from us because of a broken promise.
Ho hum. Deflating stuff, but the world’s still turning, Hull City are still going to get promoted, it’s a 5-a-side and curry night tonight - perhaps the problem isn’t that people don’t care about the dastardly machinations behind the EU, but that sometimes we care(d) *too much*?
I note that Cameron’s advice to his MPs was simply to abstain. And yet a large number of his MPs decided to ignore his leadership. OK. Fair enough. Largely a matter of indifference here.
In contrast to the way our Tory posters here have been going bananas over Nick Clegg.
I thought that the supremacy of parliament was the key Conservative objection to the treaty. Cameron’s backbenchers obviously thought so too.
Answering my own question re super delegates They are not committed - ” …superdelegates are not required to stay pledged to a specific candidate. In 2008, the Democratic Party has designated 796 super delegates.” Washington Post.
Marquee Mark, on your link 439 of the 796 have said they support one candidate or the other. Surely 357 is still quite a lot - perhaps they, and some of the 439 may move against whoever is beging to look like a loser. I wonder if it is still too close to call?
@206:
Clegg’s mistake was in making it a three line whip issue. Most self-destructive and idiotic use of a three line whip issue since IDS and Section 28.
206. he asked them to abstain over a small amendment to the treaty, with no info over what kind of whip was in place, or whethe or not there were any reprecussions. The lib dems have a 3 line whip to abstain on the much larger issue of having a referendum or not, which failed to stop nearly a quarter of the party voting for it anyway, despite knowing they’d have to resign any post they had.
206 - Was it a three line whip though? Clegg is a category difference because the split is in the open as you cannot keep three resignations a secret.
201
Spot on,in terms of voters trust in politicians which is at an all time low,Labour & the Lib Dem antics couldn’t have come at a worse time?
No need for them to bother with any GE election pledges in future as everyone knows they are worthless.
210. I would hardly say the supremacy of parliament was a small amendment. It is central to the whole EU argument.
You are saying that some Tory MPs still vote in accordance with their principles, Tory Troll? Nothing wrong with that.
Though I would have expected them also to vote for an in-out referendum. But perhaps voting with Liberal Democrats goes even further against their underlying principles.
The central issue is that;
Labour.
Conservatives.
Lib-Dems.
All said in 2005 that they would hold a referendum on the EU Constitution.
Three years down the line, only one sticks to that commitment, while Lab and Lib break their manifesto commitments. Thats the central issue. The rest is just smoke and mirrors. Maybe on some obscure poit, some Tory MP’s did rebel. Maybe some courageous Lib-Dem’s went against Clegg. Perhaps it would be interesting to know what Cameron will do when he becomes PM. But none of these things are the central issue of the matter, which is Labour and Lib-Dems saying one thing to get elected and doing something else for their own cowardly ends.
It just shows that Cameron is nowhere near as Europhobic as his party would like him to be. Cameron’s actions have been described as principled. But surely if he shared the same principles about EU powers as his party, he would have voted for parliamentary sovereignty.
Are you suggesting that Cameron’s real principles involve the subordination of Westminster to Europe, Tory Troll? I am not questioning that he does have principles, just what they might be.
216 - Parliamentary sovereignty cannot be touched. The original ECA can be repealed at the drop of a hat.
217. Who knows what he really believes. Three years down the line and its anyones guess.
Then, if we had had a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, would Cameron hae campaigned on the For or Against side? He is probably counting hmself very fortunate that the Government was not defeated.
Not break their manifesto commitment, GIN. Rather decide things have changed - not least the constitution has been scrapped and some elements included in a new treaty that adds to the existing treaties, rather than ending them.
Don’t see the problem.
@216:
Dave is a pragmatist over Europe. Somebody in his position can’t afford to be.
Whatever the actual wording, our party will have as its European policy (1) remaining a full member of the EU on the express proviso that (2) we are able to repatriate substantial powers to the UK.
The nature of the repatriated powers and the precise mechanisms by which they’ll be achieved will be left deliberately vague for the reader.
Better Off Out will be retained as a nuclear option in the unlikely event that President Blair refuses to negotiate with Britain.
Are your two conditions not just a little bit contradictory, Martin?
Interest rates kept on hold at 5.25%
222 - Wht can’t he afford to be pragmatic?
293 The rebellion in Cameron’s party went unnoticed. clegg managed the seemingly impossible task of splitting the Libdems on an EU issue: walk outs, resignations, tantrums etc. It says more about leadership style and political nous than anything else.
Interest rates not a surprise but BoE daft in worrying about today’s inflation. Economy will be stopped dead in 2 years time - which is how long they say that interest rate changes take to influence things..
High interest rates, £ dropping - which will increase cost of imports - We are doomed, all doomed, I tell ye!
@225:
Sorry, meant he can’t afford *not* to be pragmatic.
@223:
Withdrawal would be a last resort, if the EU refuses to budge. Conservative policy will be to prefer to remain as a full member, provided the EU agrees to repatriation of powers.
‘Better Off Out’ was just my shorthand for the minority of Tories who favour withdrawal without attempting to repatriate powers. I’m not one of them.
220. Cameron would have campaigned against I think, as would most tories.
Meanwhile …. Toby Harnden in the “Telegraph” on why Obama remains in the driving seat :
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/foreign/tobyharnden/mar08/barackobamawonmarch4.htm
I remember when the Liberal Party was too small to be split!!! See we are a grown up party now!
OT discovered the report in the Guardian archives (now on the net) of a speech I made to the Young Liberal conference in 1967. On worker control - whatever happened to that? Though todays 20% bonus to John Lewis Partners (owners of John Lewis and Waitrose) perhaps shows that it was a good idea after all!
The practical outcome of yesterday’s vote is that, regardless of whether it is warranted or not, every piece of bad news which The Sun (and probably the Mail) can even remotely tag to Europe will be. Whereas it could just have said “resulting from Brown’s traitorous decision to sign up to…”, it will now say “resulting from Brown and Clegg’s traitorous decision to sign up to…”
The poison will be continuously dripped into the electorate’s ear until the point at whch Brown runs out of bottling options.
I have not posted very much in recent months, but I have been reading this thread today feeling very depressed.
I have always been a pro-European, but the latest shenanigans over the Referendum & The Lisbon Treaty have made me start to wonder if Britain’s the European project is really worthwhile if the only way we can achieve it is via lies and subterfuge.
I have tried to convince myself that “white lies” are sometimes necessary, and that the Eurosceptics are only in the majority because of all the anti-EU propaganda that we get fed by the Murdoch Press and others, but I don’t believe it anymore.
Although I think that the LibDems have scored an own-goal in political terms last night, I think that they are absolutely right that what we really need is an “In-or-Out” choice with the opportunity for the in-depth debate that this subject really needs.
Sorry for boring everyone, but I had to get it off my chest. Just so fed up this morning.
232 - Is traitorous actually a word?
I agree with those who think the media are overstating Hillary’s comeback.
Pre Texas/Ohio there seemed a general consensus that she needed to be taking 60% minimum , whereas she actually only hit 54%.
I also think that she is still not getting to grips with Obama’s ground organisation.
We all know Obama has pulled a blinder by concentrating on the little contests and caucuses yet she was still unnable to get her supporters into the Texas caucus ?
She got some delegates with an extra 100,000 votes in the primary yet Obama pulled them back with an extra 20,000 in the caucus.
Sure she has a good argument about who’s vote is most representative but I’m not sure she can get close enough to make it stick.
@232:
Brown will never run out of bottling options. If there’s anything Brown has an unlimited supply of, it’s cowardice.
233. perhaps the debate is needed, however the lib dems went the wrong way about it. They kept stamping their feet over it whenever the lisbon treaty was brought up, which made them look confused and not willing to talk about the original subject.
I too was pro-europe, but after years of watching the incompetant and corrupt muppets that run it get away with murder I stopped.
A pointless piece of trivia - superdelegates only keep their vote if they stay residing in the state they are delegate for. I read a North Eastern superdelegate (I think from Maine) was going to retire in Florida so will lose his vote, reducing the number of superdelegates by one. He was a Hillary supporter.
The nomination process really is absurd.
I don’t think you can be allowed to get away with that one, Martin (228). If some powers (ie activities) are repatriated, you can hardly claim to be a “full member”.
And then again, Cuddles (229), precisely what would Cameron and most Conservaties have campaigned against? Surely not everything?
74/79: Bob Seely stood against me in 2005. He’s a pleasant youngish guy, former CCO staffer, who reduced my majority by more than the regional average. I didn’t notice his having any strong views on Europe - he may do, but they didn’t come up in the campaign. Not sure I can add more, but you could do worse.
General comments: the range of insults over the last couple of days have gone well beyond what used to get people moderated, so I’d guess that Mike has decided to allow a bit of steam-blowing. There is a general problem that people with strong views often think it impossible for people to think differently unless they’re cowards, traitors, careerists, sycophants, or worse. It’s a formula for self-isolation, since everyone disagrees about something sometimes, and if you tell them all to go and **** off you end up losing every argument. Some of the Respect types have the same problem - anyone who disagrees with them is a racist, fascist, etc.
I like being in the ‘reasonable man assailed by apparent nutters’ position, so no complaints here, but seanT and Martin C may hav eoverlooked in their fury that they’re alienating people who actually agree with them on the substance.
@234:
S: (adj) faithless, traitorous, treacherous, unfaithful, treasonable, treasonous (having the character of, or characteristic of, a traitor)
Blimey - “unfaithful” !! How many MPs/Pbers does that fit?
239. against the treaty most probably, but not against continued EU membership. No matter what Cleggy and his buds try to make out, the tory party is basically for staying in the EU, and that wont change.
@239:
Well that’s a semantic point. By “full member”, I mean “not an associate member”, i.e., not those poor bastards bound by EU law whilst having no say in its formulation.
All the EU laws we agree to be bound by we will have representation in. That’s what I meant by ‘full member’.
@240:
My rage has subsided now. It started when I couldn’t find my cufflinks this morning. I apologise for being so rude about you earlier on, it isn’t really fair of me to blame you for Gordon Brown. I mean, it’s not as if you voted for him.
@243:
Aye. There are a minority of MPs who favour unconditional withdrawal, but they’re not a blocking minority. As I said, Dave if he has any sense will keep the nuclear option in reserve for a rainy day.
240
‘anyone who disagrees with them is a racist,facist etc.’
But that’s exactly what your friend Livingstone says,each and every time there is a serious corruption allegation to answer the person raising it is smeared and called a raciost.
In that case, Cuddles (243), why did Cameron not support Bill Cash’s amendment?
I canot find much sense in the Conservative poisition (with the exception of Ken Clark, of course - but then you chose not to have him as your leader).
241 - Hmm, it just seems like an abberation from correct English to me. A traitor is a person involved in treason, which leads from a mindset of treachery which would lead to the word treacherous. It feels to me as wrong as if someone was accused of traitorism rather than treason.
Will this be a smoking gun for Hillary or a dud with blanks ? :
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/06/hillaryclinton.uselections2008
233 Disraeli. The “debate” on this thread, if you can call it that is depressing. But take heart, there is actually quite a lot to be optimistic about.
We’re only 50 years into the EU project. It’s an amazingly short period of time for any quasi govt type institution let alone something as complex as the EU.
There is a head of steam now behind reform of the EU, making it more transparent, democratic and accountable. That is a good thing! The media are beginning to provide substantial public scrutiny which we need to keep the EU in check. The fact the EU gets a bad press is a good thing. Before there would have been silence or deference. All this is a sign that the EU is beginning to mature into a real part of our lives.
There are huge problems with the EU, but solving them is what politics is all about.
re 234 yes it is, as is the adverb “traitorously” and the noun “traitorousness”, and even if you’re feeling archaic “traitorly”
234 Yes!
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/traitorous
223
the Iraq war started with “lies and subterfuge”… with the Main Opposition Party (Conservatives) doing no opposition. The only Party that came out with honour was the LibDems.
And after yesterday, the LibDems - as others have pointed out- have now lost the titl of “idealistic party of principles”.
Anyone who trust politicians for their own long term good - take SERPS - has been proven to be an idiot. And breaking manifesto promises is nothing new.
That’s why all this fuss leaves me cold… a lot of it is synthetic for purely party reasons. It does not excuse or rectify the breaking of promises…
That could be why voters are giving up on politicians: they are basically all the same: untrustworthy when members of a party although as individual MPs often efficient, honest, hardworking and worthy of our support.
At least in the US if a politician does not like the Party line, he votes against it.
@247:
One presumes that Dave didn’t see any point in provoking a confrontation on an amendment he couldn’t win. A line of thinking that somebody should have suggested to Cleggnut.
240 I am quite open minded on Europe. I am not open minded on being lied to by the governing party we elected. Whilst I haven’t posted on the subject, an inner rage has been brewing within and I won’t forget those lies when it comes to placing my X at the next election. You have to hope that there are enough of your supporters out there who don’t mind being lied to or don’t realise they are being lied to.
247. he must have had his reasons, seeing as details of the subject are very scarce I’ll have to assume they were good ones.
Immigration and crime are the most serious problems on most people’s list. If it was more generally understood that EU laws, over which we have no control,is the driving force behind many of these problems,the EU would rate much more highly.Our tragedy is that politicians know this but self interest prevents them from saying it.
249 Hillary still hasn’t issued her tax returns, either, Jack W.
The markets and the media have overplayed Clinton’s victories. March 4th matched ST in that Clinton won symbolicaly, but Obama looks stronger once the dust has settled.
Clinton is still a 5/1 shot for the nomination. Here is why. She is still alive, after withstanding a month where the momentum was all with Obama. For the first time since NH she has won late deciders. She is still in the race, and most other people feel it is legitimate that she continue. This is important in terms of endorsements and donors.
She has 6 weeks in which it is at least possible for her to gain ground. She will continue to hammer Obama on experience and hope that the media join in a bit as well. The advantage she has is that she is a fighter. I only just caught a bit of the Ohio debate and thought she came across as more passionate and caring than Obama, who seemed to treat it as an academic exercise. He needs to stop trying to play the clock out (it didn’t work in NH or in TX and OH).
However she needs to start winning bigger victories than she has thus far. She needs to win Pennsylvania by a 15-20 point margin. That is improbable but not impossible.
.. and if we joined Schengen, (possible) and the Euro , regrettably unlikely (Perhaps a small wager that a future Tory Gov takes us in?), we could have a really good EU that worked well for all of us!
More on the Tory amendment:
“As everyone examined the damage done to Nick Clegg’s leadership by the largest Lib Dem rebellion in six years, the Commons also divided on New Clause 9 in the name of William Cash. It stated that nothing in the new Treaty of Lisbon should be construed by any court in the United Kingdom as affecting the supremacy of the United Kingdom Parliament.
The Conservative frontbench line was to abstain. But 40 Conservative MPs, including 12 members of the 2005 intake, voted for Cash’s clause. Europhile Ken Clarke voted with the Government in the no lobby.
This was the largest Conservative rebellion since David Cameron came to power, involving a quarter of his MPs. It was also the largest rebellion by MPs of any party during the passage of the Bill to date. Since no-one else seems to be reporting this, we thought we’d better let you know…
UPDATE: We’ve now been told that this was a free vote for backbenchers. But still… There’s a clear frontbench line (which is to abstain), and 40 MPs go into the other lobby. It may not be a rebellion, but it’s a split, and a revealing split.”
(www.revolts.co.uk)
[249] The timing is rather fab, eh Jack? We can only assume that they hold an entire canning factory of worms.
261. a revealing split? more like somethings being read into it. It was a free vote, the frontbench line was to abstain but it was basically a free vote. Your going have to dig a great deal more to make a mountain out of this molehill.
re 235 well, I think it’s a helluva comeback. The momentum and the money was so with Obama. I thought it could be a draw on Tuesday and game over.
I’m very surprised Hillary got so many more votes (no way was she going to get 60% in Ohio). OK the delegate count didn’t match the votes. But that’s not really the point. Hillary’s only hope is that the super-delegates believe they are there to do a job - settle a close contest which is effectively a draw if you add up the votes and, with a keen eye on winning in November, adjust a little for where they were distributed. If they declare themselves redundant it’s all over. But I don’t recall many examples of people believing their own job should disappear!
Key for Clinton is that she starts to look stronger vs McCain. Seemed most unlikely given McCain/Obama attract Independents and Clinton alientates outside Dem base. But small amount of evidence for that now. She needs more of it.
Good news for Obama in the latest ABC/Washington Post poll - he has a whopping 13% lead over McCain in the hypothetical match up, with Clinton having only a 2% lead if she is candidate. I don’t place much store by the hypothetical polls myself but this will presumably reinforce his person to beat McCain/long coat tails appeal to superdelegates which had been called into question and generally settle nerves.
“Why all the fuss over an issue that barely registers?”
Thank God - at last someone noticed.
But why was it a free vote just for the backbenchers and not for the front benchers?
If Cameron believes the treaty would give away too much power, why did neither he nor his shadow cabinet vote to retain powers? All they voted for was a referendum.
Now that has failed, Cameron’s real views will not be known before an election.
re 265 how timely! that is exactly what Obama needs!
@261:
If there’s a free vote, by definition there can be no rebellion.
Clegg, on the other hand, had 25% of the parliamentary party rebel against a three line whip, which is utterly devastating to his authority.
Typically, those who defy three line whips get excluded from parliamentary party meetings. Will Clegg do that with a quarter of his MPs?
261 Do you understand the concept of a “free vote”. You really are a desperate numpty if you are trying to claim political damage to Cameron from the fact that his party did not vote with one voice in a free vote. I suppose if they had all voted the same way, you would have invoked the “they’re all Cameron clones!!” argument.
264 - It was a great result for Clinton. Most of the pudits thought it was all over. However it only did enough to keep her in the race. To win it means doing even better in the next contests. Possible but not probably. It is close but the clock is running out. She is 140+ pledged delegates behind with only 600 odd left to be allocated. It is almost impossible for her to catch him. You’re right that the match-ups will become important.
Interestingly she did much better in Ohio and Texas among Independents. She must keep that going in future contests (although PA is closed so that is probably a boon for her there).
A note on the Obama campaign - they are wrong to keep saying Clinton can’t catch him in pledged delegates. Instead they should be saying that whoever has the most pledged delegates should be supported by the supers. Inevitability doesn’t work - it didn’t work for Clinton and won’t work for Obama. People don’t want to be told that the contest is over and that their vote is irrelevant. They want to feel as though they can influence the contest.
267. no idea, however that article and your insinuations are that the party is split, which it doesnt show in the slightest. There was no whip, and it was a free vote. Somehow equating that to a telling split speaks more about what the author wants it to be.
I never said anything about damage. A free vote is a free vote even if it is only for some.
But why did he do it? Why abstain on the fundamental issue about the treaty?
264 “OK the delegate count didn’t match the votes. But that’s not really the point.”
Er…it is exactly the point.
The poll refered to for this thread is both a problem and an opportunity for the Conservatives. On one hand it means the political capital the Conservatives can make out of the Europe issue is limited, it also means hwoever, that if Cameron can get into number 10, he can be much more radical on the issue if he wants, without damaging himself politically, as the public woulc not care which way the Governemnt of the day goes on this issue.
@273:
Because Parliamentary sovereignty was never in doubt, because it flows from the sovereign, not from the EU. So the amendment was just some typical Bill Cash cockwaving, and Dave presumably thought he had no great need to take a stand on it.
Key for Clinton is that she starts to look stronger vs McCain. Seemed most unlikely given McCain/Obama attract Independents and Clinton alientates outside Dem base. But small amount of evidence for that now. She needs more of it.
by Martin Smith March 6th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Good news for Obama in the latest ABC/Washington Post poll - he has a whopping 13% lead over McCain in the hypothetical match up, with Clinton having only a 2% lead if she is candidate.
by James March 6th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
Comedy is all about timing!
Except he did take a stand on it. He abstained and told his front bench to as well.
And if parliamentary sovereignty is really not affected, what is the problem with the treaty?
More cowardice from Brown, this time on ID Cards;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7280495.stm
He still wants them, but not until conned people to giving him another 5 years in 2010.
Still, with Labour going to be kicked out of office and the Tories pledging to scrap the plan, most of us will hopefully never have to carry ID Cards.
@278:
He made it a FREE VOTE. That’s the opposite of taking a stand.
The problem with the treaty is that it hands far too much power to the EU. Parliamentary sovereignty means that it will always be possible for Parliament to reclaim those powers however, which is what I imagine the Tory parliament from 2009- (or perhaps 2010-) will do.
278 - Parliamentary sovereignty is affected only to the extent that Parliament is willing to tolerate it. If Parliament wished it could reassert it’s ultimate sovereignty in a one line bill.
More cowardice from Brown, this time on ID Cards;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7280495.stm
He still wants them, but not until he’s conned people into giving him another 5 years in 2010.
Still, with Labour going to be kicked out of office in 2010 and the Tories pledging to scrap this plan, most of us will hopefully never have to carry ID Cards
278. the variety of powers being seceeded to the EU, various vetos etc.
But it wasn’t a free vote for the front bench. Why not?
And the amendment would have prevented any need to reclaim powers at a later date.
If it was such a pointless amendment why was there the order to abstain?
284. i’m confused why your so interested in it, it was a free vote so it couldnt have been a rebellion, and his front bench abstained as ordered. where is the problem?
276. I do wonder if Labour wanted a parliamentry debate to go on for a while to get Bill Cash et al on television, like in the 1990’s. In fact it would not surprise me at all if that was the motive, problem for Labour is that the Tories are not in government and Bill Cash will only be noted (Dog whistle fashion) by people of the political class or those who have an interest in the subject and watch the parliament channel. Think one must also remeber that a lot of the Tory brigade who were maastrict rebels are either dead, retired or defected to UKIP.
So on balance it has caused no problems for the tories - mutch damage to Nick Clegg’s faltering “leadership” (You cannot really say abtaining is leadership can you! - Nick Robinson said that the LD leader was running toward the sound of gunfire! (Can i have what ever Nick Robinson has been taking?!!
). The Labour party has got away with a short term implememtation of EU policy that will only serve to agitate and make a particular type of Tory voter motivated to vote in local elections in the most eurosceptic parts of the country this year - London, the south east and south west - places where UKIP had prospered in the past - oh dear Labour!
261, 267:
Ah, there’s nothing new under the sun! I seem to remember Labour trying (but not particularly succeeding) to make hay over ‘Tory splits’ when a number of back-benchers voted against Mrs T’s free-vote proposal on Sunday trading.
282 Refer you to the helpful True Guide to the Lisbon Treaty (see my post 65) couple of phrases seem to have a bearing:
“The primacy of EU law is affirmed, if rather clumsily. Member states must ensure adequate remedies, and the powers of the Court and the Commission to impose penalties in case of infringement are increased”
“Member states may only sign international agreements that are compatible with EU law.”
Mr Cash’s amendment was well crafted to re-assert UK Parliamentary Sovereignty against the existing and Lisbon treaty - Mr Cameron sensibly didn’t want to get into irreversible decisions before any re-negotiations or discussions (why box yourself in unnecessarily) but neither did he think it was necessary to impose a whip on his backbenchers.
As I said above, it just shows that Cameron is nowhere near as Europhobic as his party (and some posters her) would like him to be. How many of his front bench would have voted for the amendment given a chance?
There is no need for me to invent a split over Europe. All three parties have them. But all this stuff about Conservative unity and principle over the issue is ridiculous. Cameron has as big a problem with it as previous Tory leaders.
289. see 288. Cameron saw no point in establishing a whip over the amendment as he knew it wouldnt pass, therefore allowing the backbenchers a free vote was sensible and allowed him to concentrate on the main vote. Also, your view that Cameron as a big a problem over europe as previous tory leaders seems to be based on one vote where there was no whip, your own surmise and assumptions, and some guesses.
I am rather pleased that my (Lib Dem) MP voted for the referendum, and it will do much towards securing my vote at the next general election.
Well I BLOODY CARE and I don’t own a newspaper.
290. Well of course. This is a political betting site. You pays your money and you takes your guess. But I have seen no reason to see why anything has changed under Cameron. The ongoing delay over EPP, the problems with post-ratification, ConservativeHome, the opinions of tory supporters here, and this amendment do not lead me to think otherwise. Maybe I’m wrong, but now there is no referendum we will not know for sure until after an election.
291 Yeah, but I bet that when it comes down to it, you will find a good reason to avoid doing so!
Well I’ve just found Obama some delegates or rather, not lost him a whole 55. Puerto Rico (55 Delegates) is a normal caucus - the “en-bloc” story is apparently a myth. Rod Crosby - amend the sheet!
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/will_puerto_rico_decide_everyt.html
Nick@ 240.
You make a fair point.
‘Some of the Respect types have the same problem - anyone who disagrees with them is a racist, fascist, etc.’
That seems to be the tactic of Ken, Harriet and Hazel re Boris.
Since the laters comments were heavily trailed in the media before their delivery at the Spring Conference and therefore were sanctioned [by Gordon], do you condemn them with equal vigour?
Tory Troll
A free vote is a free vote.
A three line whip [the accompanied with the threat of the sack] is just that.
Its a simple difference.
Cameron = good leader.
Clegg = bad leader.
Its a simple difference
‘anyone who disagrees with them is a racist,facist etc.’
Rather than being the preserve of Respect, that sounds like standard New Labour tactics to me. Rose Addis, for example. Or even William Hague in 2001.
261,287 re splits — I’ve never seen any convincing evidence the great British public cares about splits. Political hacks get cause and effect the wrong way round: usually it is unpopularity which causes splits.
297. I don’t want to go over and over this, but it wasn’t a free vote for the front bench.
On your second point though I agree, Clegg is crap.
294:
“291 Yeah, but I bet that when it comes down to it, you will find a good reason to avoid doing so!”
Hmm. I’ve voted Lib Dem (or their predecessors) in every Westminster election since a 1960 bye-election. I’d would have probably voted Lib Dem again even if my MP had voted against the referendum.
But now…
300. “I don’t want to go over and over this”
actually i rather think you do and have been
Martin, I am beginning to get a bit worried about you. Yesterday you were triumphing in the fact that you proved “stimulating” to Nick Palmer…. Today you write this:
“So the amendment was just some typical Bill Cash cockwaving, and Dave presumably thought he had no great need to take a stand on it.”
There is a certain Labour MP who seems to take a certain delight in producing ambiguously phrased gay-type utterances - presumably Andrea can give you the reference, if needed - and I am beginning to suspect that you maight even be he.
After all, traditional Tories do not express themselves in such indecorous language as you have been using over the last couple of days. Even hard-line Conservatives are shocked!
Cleggy would a-whipping go,
Ha ha.
Cleggy would a-whipping go,
Ha ha.
Cleggy would a-whipping go,
Whether his party would let him or no,
Ha ha.
Anyone got updated figures for delegates including the Texas caucuses ?
@303:
The day I stop producing ambiguously-worded gay-type utterances is the day I lose my spunk and vim for life.
282 — You said it, GIN!
New thread - What odds that McCain won’t be the nominee?
Harry 305. See upthread my 151.
302. No more. I promise
295. I have left the sheet open to consider the “possibility” of Puerto Rico awarding its delegates by FPTP, purely as a mathematical exercise. Frankly, though, as I said when this story first broke, it was never going to happen.
Btw, Clinton’s dropped another two Superdelegates overnight. Her lead was 96 a month ago; it’s now 40. At this rate it will have vanished completely in three weeks time.
Face it, the Witch was dead after Super Tuesday; Maine was the stake through the heart. Ohio and RI were just post-mortem twitches. It’s safe to come out again.
http://www.titanictown.plus.com/Democrats.xls
Ding Dong!
209-Now that was an issue that really would have been low low low in the Mori “Most important issues register”.
I can’t remember there ever being a rebellion of a quarter of Lib Dem MPs. That’s almost as large proportionately as the rebellion against Blair on the Iraq war, which was over 100 MPs out of nearly 400. Was it a case of Clegg taking responsibility, i.e. he couldn’t risk putting the Lib Dem vote against because the government might not win, and the consequences for European politics were so severe?
This may be an indication that Clegg is willing to take on his party on the big issues, far more so than any recent leader. Kennedy was very much a consensual leader, and the Lib Dems whipped whichever way most people wanted to go.
Ever considered that the average Joe in the street might tell you that the top seven or eight depend upon the effects of the EU, lack of proper border controls, and greater “integration”?
My fundamental postition is that initiatives such as the single market, carbon trading, coordination of WTO postions, coordination of humanitarian/peacekeeping duties are hugely beneficial to Britain, Europe and the world. But the EU has for the first 50 years of its existence been dominated by the self-interested French - hence the odious CAP.
Lisbon is a waste of time. Chirac wanted a constitution as a monument to himself as “payment” for “allowing” the freed peoples of Eastern Europe to join the EU. Odious man. But now we have an EU of 27, the ability of France via Germany to call the shots is over. Liberals now have the chance to create the EU they want and the argument is going the way of liberals - Barroso, Mandleson, Juncker, Trichet are the most powerful Eurocrats and all accept the economic liberal argument.
As for Lisbon I can’t find the list of 50 opt outs - I have read it somewhere but honestly they are either on peripheral issues or relate to hypothetical groups of countries that decide to go it alone. As for worries about a “president” and a “foreign minister” well, there has been a foreign policy supremo since Maastricht (currently Javier Solana) and he really doesn’t have much power does he; akin to the General Sec. of NATO. There is nothing in Lisbon to change this. The president of the European Council and FP rep. will only have powers that are bestowed unanimously, as is the case with the current post of political head of the eurozone for example.
I live in Luxembourg and I know a lot of eurocrats. And the most common wish from the liberals is that the UK would stop messing about and take the lead. And I get the feeling Cameron knows this.