Email Cameron today demanding a referendum!

[anonymous-user]

Now that the Lisbon Treaty is all but ratified it is time to put pressure on David Cameron to promise to hold the referendum that he has been calling for, even though the ratification process will have finished. If enough people do then who knows?

I'm sending this.

[e-mail]

Dear Mr Cameron

In the increasingly likely event that the Czech Republic ratify the Lisbon Treaty it will pass into law before the next British General Election. This fundamental piece of legislation will have been approved without the consultation of the British electorate by a discredited and unpopular government led by a Prime Minister who has no personal mandate whatsoever.

You have consistently called for a referendum to be held on this crucial issue so that the British electorate may be given the opportunity to make a democratic choice. As a potential Conservative voter can you assure me that you will make it clear that, whether or not the treaty is ratified before the election, you will allow the voice of the British electorate to be heard by holding an immediate referendum should you win that election. Furthermore will you make it clear to the EU commission that this is your intent.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

[Bluebarge]

Waste of time. Trying to unpick a treaty that UK's government and all of our European partners have agreed to would merely p*ss off all our European partners, discourage overseas investment in Britain and reduce Britain's influence where it matters. Far better to work with the other centre-right parties who now dominate European politics to obtain what you want.

[Shoot Blair]

Bluebarge said:

Waste of time. Trying to unpick a treaty that UK's government and all of our European partners have agreed to would merely p*ss off all our European partners, discourage overseas investment in Britain and reduce Britain's influence where it matters. Far better to work with the other centre-right parties who now dominate European politics to obtain what you want.

You gain investment by having competitive tax laws. This is precisely why so many companies are here in the first place. If we go into a federal monetary system, this advantage is lost and then rightly so, we will have to compete with the rest of the world and I imagine they would locate somewhere that would take advantage of the inflexibility of EU finance.

You are Peter Mandelson and ICMFP

[anonymous-user]

Bluebarge said:

Waste of time. Trying to unpick a treaty that UK's government and all of our European partners have agreed to would merely p*ss off all our European partners, discourage overseas investment in Britain and reduce Britain's influence where it matters. Far better to work with the other centre-right parties who now dominate European politics to obtain what you want.

I disagree. I don't want a federal Europe, a European "President" or a European foreign minister. I do not want to cede even more rights and powers to an unelected European Commission. I do not want to take even more power away from British courts and cede it to courts in Europe. I do not want to see Britains veto on important matters removed. I believe that these views are those of a large majority of Britons and that a referendum would prove that, which is why Labour and the EU aparachiks are desperate to stop us having one!

I place the national sovereignty of my country and its democracy ahead of pissing off our European "partners".

Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 30th October 11:01

[AndrewW-G]

Shoot Blair said:

Bluebarge said:

Waste of time. Trying to unpick a treaty that UK's government and all of our European partners have agreed to would merely p*ss off all our European partners, discourage overseas investment in Britain and reduce Britain's influence where it matters. Far better to work with the other centre-right parties who now dominate European politics to obtain what you want.

You gain investment by having competitive tax laws. This is precisely why so many companies are here in the first place. If we go into a federal monetary system, this advantage is lost and then rightly so, we will have to compete with the rest of the world and I imagine they would locate somewhere that would take advantage of the inflexibility of EU finance. /quote]

we've already seen a great number of countries move manufacturing to cheaper parts of the EU, what kind of idiot wants to encourage this behaviour............ the labour party thats who!

[anonymous-user]

Guam said:

TVR Moneypit said:

Guam said:

Written to him

Good Idea, whether he acts on this or not will give us a good indication f whether he is fit to vote for wont it

Waste of time IMHO.

I've sent emails off to Conservative HQ several times about this very issue. My emails are either ignored, or I get a load of waffle and bullst back.


I desperatly want to see the back of Labour for a lifetime, I appriciate tactical voting, am true blue, but the Conservatives are coming very, very close to loosing my vote if UKIP run a candidate in my area. Again I have emailed these thoughts to Conservative HQ, but after a couple of months, have yet to get a reply.


It's almost like they don't want to win the next GE

Well if everybody on here emails him and their friends and their friends etc etc maybe he will begin to get the point

I agree. They can ignore a few but not a few thousand. Plus I'm sure they are getting pressure from their membership, which is overwhelmingly eurosceptic so the more pressure we can apply the better. Got to be worth 5 mins for an email?

[JagLover]

TVR Moneypit said:

I desperatly want to see the back of Labour for a lifetime, I appriciate tactical voting, am true blue, but the Conservatives are coming very, very close to loosing my vote if UKIP run a candidate in my area. Again I have emailed these thoughts to Conservative HQ, but after a couple of months, have yet to get a reply.

It wasn't the Tories that signed the Lisbon treaty, but Labour.

Splitting the right wing vote, by voting UKIP at a general election, accomplishes nothing.

[Jasandjules]

I've e-mailed him.

Basically, will I be voting Tory or UKIP.............

[randlemarcus]

The way I see this, its analogous to a contractual issue. Up until the Czechs are bribed, sorry, make up their minds to ratify the Treaty, the UK is in a position to change its mind. Under Labour, no chance, under the Tories, a possibility, which is why they have promised a referendum if its not ratified.

Once ratified, we have a contractual position with the EU, and its unlikely that pulling out afterwards, some scowls from France are going to be the only cost to the UK.

As far as the next election goes, once ratified, the only way DC can do anything about this is by not putting Conservative candidates up for election, and asking everyone to vote UKIP instead. That way, they pull the UK out of Europe totally, and DC is free to pick up the reins in a years time, once we're totally bankrupt, just before we invade

Realistically, we're screwed, Labour have tied the UK to this particular wagon, and we're going to have to put up with an unelected leader for a few more years, regardless of the impending Winky defeat.

[Shoot Blair]

JagLover said:

TVR Moneypit said:

I desperatly want to see the back of Labour for a lifetime, I appriciate tactical voting, am true blue, but the Conservatives are coming very, very close to loosing my vote if UKIP run a candidate in my area. Again I have emailed these thoughts to Conservative HQ, but after a couple of months, have yet to get a reply.

It wasn't the Tories that signed the Lisbon treaty, but Labour.

Splitting the right wing vote, by voting UKIP at a general election, accomplishes nothing.

TORY AREN'T RIGHT WING ANYMORE YOU fkING MONG!!!!!!!

[Mojocvh]

randlemarcus said:

The way I see this, its analogous to a contractual issue. Up until the Czechs are bribed, sorry, make up their minds to ratify the Treaty, the UK is in a position to change its mind. Under Labour, no chance, under the Tories, a possibility, which is why they have promised a referendum if its not ratified.

Once ratified, we have a contractual position with the EU, and its unlikely that pulling out afterwards, some scowls from France are going to be the only cost to the UK.

As far as the next election goes, once ratified, the only way DC can do anything about this is by not putting Conservative candidates up for election, and asking everyone to vote UKIP instead. That way, they pull the UK out of Europe totally, and DC is free to pick up the reins in a years time, once we're totally bankrupt, just before we invade

Realistically, we're screwed, Labour have tied the UK to this particular wagon, and we're going to have to put up with an unelected leader for a few more years, regardless of the impending Winky defeat.

And that, in a nutshell is that.

However he very clever ploy of splitting the centre/right vote by using the referendum/non referendum issue is, you have to admit, VERY clever politics.

[anonymous-user]

randlemarcus said:

The way I see this, its analogous to a contractual issue. Up until the Czechs are bribed, sorry, make up their minds to ratify the Treaty, the UK is in a position to change its mind. Under Labour, no chance, under the Tories, a possibility, which is why they have promised a referendum if its not ratified.

Once ratified, we have a contractual position with the EU, and its unlikely that pulling out afterwards, some scowls from France are going to be the only cost to the UK.

As far as the next election goes, once ratified, the only way DC can do anything about this is by not putting Conservative candidates up for election, and asking everyone to vote UKIP instead. That way, they pull the UK out of Europe totally, and DC is free to pick up the reins in a years time, once we're totally bankrupt, just before we invade

Realistically, we're screwed, Labour have tied the UK to this particular wagon, and we're going to have to put up with an unelected leader for a few more years, regardless of the impending Winky defeat.

Norway and Switzerland do fine outside of the EU and so could we. We would get a huge cost dividend in leaving and there is no way that we would not get a free trade agreement. They would not want us to leave because it would be economically detrimental to the EU if we did and if CMD says right now that we will have a referendum come what may then they have fair warning. They would negotiate and if they wouldn't then furk em, we'll leave and be better off for it.

[emicen]

I've emailed him on this issue. Awaiting a response.

[Bluebarge]

Shoot Blair said:

Bluebarge said:

Waste of time. Trying to unpick a treaty that UK's government and all of our European partners have agreed to would merely p*ss off all our European partners, discourage overseas investment in Britain and reduce Britain's influence where it matters. Far better to work with the other centre-right parties who now dominate European politics to obtain what you want.

You gain investment by having competitive tax laws. This is precisely why so many companies are here in the first place. If we go into a federal monetary system, this advantage is lost and then rightly so, we will have to compete with the rest of the world and I imagine they would locate somewhere that would take advantage of the inflexibility of EU finance.

You are Peter Mandelson and ICMFP

1. The Lisbon Treaty has nothing to do with joining the Euro;
2. Eire are part of the Euro and have been running a low corporation tax regime for a long time.

[Bluebarge]

unrepentant said:

randlemarcus said:

The way I see this, its analogous to a contractual issue. Up until the Czechs are bribed, sorry, make up their minds to ratify the Treaty, the UK is in a position to change its mind. Under Labour, no chance, under the Tories, a possibility, which is why they have promised a referendum if its not ratified.

Once ratified, we have a contractual position with the EU, and its unlikely that pulling out afterwards, some scowls from France are going to be the only cost to the UK.

As far as the next election goes, once ratified, the only way DC can do anything about this is by not putting Conservative candidates up for election, and asking everyone to vote UKIP instead. That way, they pull the UK out of Europe totally, and DC is free to pick up the reins in a years time, once we're totally bankrupt, just before we invade

Realistically, we're screwed, Labour have tied the UK to this particular wagon, and we're going to have to put up with an unelected leader for a few more years, regardless of the impending Winky defeat.

Norway and Switzerland do fine outside of the EU and so could we. We would get a huge cost dividend in leaving and there is no way that we would not get a free trade agreement. They would not want us to leave because it would be economically detrimental to the EU if we did and if CMD says right now that we will have a referendum come what may then they have fair warning. They would negotiate and if they wouldn't then furk em, we'll leave and be better off for it.

Norway and Switzerland are part of the EEA which is increasingly dictated to by the EU. You will not escape the EU's influence by leaving it or becoming semi-detached, you will merely lose the ability to influence EU policy. That's politics - big power blocs/countries dictate to smaller ones. The US have just told Winky that it's not interested in dealing with the Uk as a stand-alone "special relationship", it wants the UK to participate fully in the EU. So if the UK leaves the EU where would it go? - in the corner marked "irrelevant". That's the realpolitik chaps, and no amount of flag-waving and ill-informed nostalgia will change that

[JagLover]

Bluebarge said:

in the corner marked "irrelevant". That's the realpolitik chaps, and no amount of flag-waving and ill-informed nostalgia will change that

Those opposed to further European integration are, for the most part, opposed to giving yet more power over their lives to a remote unelected EU administration, not by some sort of flag waving nostalgia.

It is your own desire to remain 'relevant' and America's best buddy, by becoming part of a European Super-state that seems to me to be nostalgia for the days of great power and Empire.

Edited by JagLover on Friday 30th October 15:37

[AndrewW-G]

Bluebarge said:

Norway and Switzerland are part of the EEA which is increasingly dictated to by the EU. You will not escape the EU's influence by leaving it or becoming semi-detached, you will merely lose the ability to influence EU policy.
That's politics - big power blocs/countries dictate to smaller ones. The US have just told Winky that it's not interested in dealing with the Uk as a stand-alone "special relationship", it wants the UK to participate fully in the EU.

So if the UK leaves the EU where would it go? - in the corner marked "irrelevant". That's the realpolitik chaps, and no amount of flag-waving and ill-informed nostalgia will change that

1. Switzerland and Norway are still in a position whereby they have a choice whether or not to accept EU proposals. Once ratified the Lisbon treaty will mean that we will not have a choice, yes I know that winky negotiated “protocols” that would remove us from majority voted decisions, but other parts of the treaty over rule these protocols.

2. The UK is still a significant economic power, the EU needs the UK far more than the UK needs the EU and the flow of money from the UK would seem to reflect this.

3. The US have reiterated that the "special relationship" is still going strong ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic... ), would you care to post a source for your counter argument.
Any damage to this relationship has been caused by the actions of winky and co over the past couple of years.

4. As per 2, it’s ridiculous to claim that members countries of the EU wouldn’t stop wanting to trade with and in the UK, if we withdrew from the confines of the Lisbon treaty. Things aren’t always black and white and in this case there is a common ground in the middle that could satisfy both the yes and no camps.

Had there been a referendum and the facts, goals & plans been impartially presented to the general public, then most people would have abided by the results of that referendum, had a majority voted yes.

We have been denied that opportunity and are rightly questioning not only why we haven’t been given it, but also the greater subject of what benefit will we gain from the Lisbon treaty. Given previous labour scaremongering and misinformation I’m inclined to believe that voting anyway other than the way labour want is the right thing to do

[anonymous-user]

Bluebarge said:

The US have just told Winky that it's not interested in dealing with the Uk as a stand-alone "special relationship", it wants the UK to participate fully in the EU.

That's it, keep re-cycling unattributed left wing Guardian claptrap.

[Bluebarge]

JagLover said:

Bluebarge said:

in the corner marked "irrelevant". That's the realpolitik chaps, and no amount of flag-waving and ill-informed nostalgia will change that

Those opposed to further European integration are, for the most part, opposed to giving yet more power over their lives to a remote unelected EU administration, not by some sort of flag waving nostalgia.

It is your own desire to remain 'relevant' and America's best buddy, but becoming part of a European Super-state that seems to me to be nostalgia for the days of great power and Empire.

Er, it's not remote, it's in Brussels and it's not unelected - the European Parliament is directly elected and members of the Commission are chosen by member govts who are elected. You might as well claim that the UK cabinet is "unelected" because it was chosen by the Prime Minister.

I've no desire to be America's best buddy and I've absolutely no nostalgia for the past, I just wish to see Britain protecting its best interests and, given that (i) 60% of our trade is with the EU and (ii) the "special relationship" with the US is increasingly irrelevant given the changing ethnic mix in the US and their focus on the East, our interest lies in taking an active part in the EU.

[anonymous-user]

Bluebarge said:

Er, it's not remote, it's in Brussels and it's not unelected - the European Parliament is directly elected and members of the Commission are chosen by member govts who are elected. You might as well claim that the UK cabinet is "unelected" because it was chosen by the Prime Minister.

The European commission is entirely unelected. The UK cabinet is entirely made up of elected members of parliament except for a few appointed Peers. Totally different.