So David Cameron has ‘laid down the law’, informing his EU fellow Heads of State just what and what is not acceptable to the United Kingdom where our membership of the European Union is concerned – well, that is what he said he would do, many moons ago.
As with ‘everything Cameron’, there is a vast difference in what he says he will do and what he eventually does. We had a demand for ‘full-on’ treaty change; now we now learn that we can’t have ‘full-on’ treaty change prior to ‘his referendum’. We now find that what we are likely to get is a ‘promise’ that his demands will be incorporated into the process of a future treaty change, something that will be legally binding – as and when that may happen. On this point of a promise, one can but refer to Richard North’s point (in the comments section) that there is a vast difference twixt legally binding and politically binding.
Not only the foregoing, but we have been told that some of Cameron’s demands will not be countenanced (freedom of movement for example) – which only highlights the point that renegotiation of the non-negotiable is just not ‘on the table’; as those of us with a brain knew only too well. This – and the result of the recent meeting of the European Council held this week – rather places those Conservative MPs, who were content to ‘wait and see’the results of Cameron’s ‘renegotiation’, in a rather awkward position – besides making them look niaive and gullible (what say you, Paterson, Redwood, Baker, et all?).
We now find, according to the Guardian, that Cameron intends to hold the referendum on a ‘risk basis’; namely a strategy of informing the electorate of the ‘risks’ should we reject his recommendation that we remain a member of the EU. The question that then arises is why the hell should we trust a man who has repeatedly lied and misled us in the past on ‘matters EU” and who, do not forget, refused to answer my detailed questions about his stance where membership of the EU is concerned.
Reverting to the earlier link to Richard North’s article, we are not only ‘being played [with]’, we are also being taken for fools; plus we also find ourselves in the position of having our minds being made up for us by our political class through their manipulation of the information that their cohorts in the media feed us.
And we do not live in a democratised dictatorship? Of course we do – and so we will remain; until we are able to enjoy the benefits of The Harrogate Agenda.
For all Cameron’s ‘bustering’ prior to the European Council this week – and the ‘hype’ that preceded it by him and the Foreign Office – if we look at the Conclusions issued by the European Union to said meeting, we find that Cameron was but a ‘footnote’ in the agenda, warranting but a one-and-a-half-line paragraph at the end. So much for the UK ‘having ‘influence’ at the, supposedly, table that matters?
Just what the hell is this all about – other than Cameron attempting to secure his place in history as a total idiot?
While no longer a constituent of David Cameron, I do have a direct email contact with him; consequently it is my intention over this weekend to take him to task over his latest ‘ploy’ – not that I expect a response other than the standard ploy of his refusing to respond, based on the fact I have moved. Notwithstanding that, he is still, unfortunately, my prime minister and as such he owes me as a member of the electorate – if we have any vestige of democracy left in this country – a response.
Stay tuned, do………………………..