chikrodah

I agree, M3. Not all UKIP members are ex-Tory, it managed to attract good people from both Labour and Lib Dem branches as well. If it sticks with being the ex-Tory party (judging by the attitudes of some branch members, we'd have to rename it the Monday Club 2) then UKIP will lose both non-Tory members and any chance of getting into Westminster as an effective new political force.

Still, perhaps aarable is right. Perhaps the senior members and UKIP HO are keen on aarable's "third way" and the rest of us are out of line with their objectives.

I won't be able to vote UKIP, let alone support UKIP if that's the case. I would be disappointed if the efforts I and others put in were purely to keep the Tory Right in power. I'd appreciate it if Gawain, gc, or Mark Croucher could let us know whether this is to be part of UKIP policy in future. An honest admission now could help whittle the disaffected out of UKIP once and for all.

jim h

Several of the Lords have e-mail addresses and I have targetted those who are described as crossbenchers on the website mdetails of which were given at the start of this thread.
The Lords could well throw a spanner in the works.
So far I have had replies from 4 , 2 against a referendum , 1 in favour and the 4th who said he will listen to the debate and then decide.

Tony Bennett

jim h wrote: "Several of the Lords have e-mail addresses and I have targetted those who are described as crossbenchers on the website, details of which were given at the start of this thread. So far I have had replies from 4, 2 against a referendum, 1 in favour and the 4th who said he will listen to the debate and then decide".

REPLY: jim h, many thanks for taking this action. Whilst I think we in CREC have written a good letter to each of the Lords (will publish the full text soon - it's going out in the next 7 days), the *volume* of representations to them is what is going to count. The e-mails don't have to be long. The Lords' vote on the referendum could be absolutely critical to the future of this country. It is, arguably, such a watershed moment in our nation's history - just as was 1 January 1973. Thanks again

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tony Bennett

Comments are evidence we should leave EU - Letter from Mr Stan Parr to Worcester Evening News

19 March 2008

SOMEBODY recently kindly pointed out to me some statements from three well-known EU politicians, when they were asked about the latest Lisbon 'Reform Treaty'.

I think they speak volumes about the type of organisation we are actually dealing with in the EU and Brussels.

They are: Giuliano Amato, former Italian Prime Minister said at a meeting of the Centre for European Reform on February 21 2007 - "The good thing about not calling it a 'Constitution' is that no one can ask for a referendum on it."

Later, on July 12 2007, he also said that EU leaders - "Decided that the document should be unreadable. If it is unreadable, it is not constitutional, that was the sort of perception. Where they got this perception from is a mystery to me. In order to make our citizens happy, they produce a document that they will never understand!"

Karel de Gucht, Belgian Foreign Minister said on June 23 2007 in Flandreinfo – "The aim of the Constitutional treaty was to be more readable; the aim of this Treaty is to be unreadable...The Constitution aimed to be clear, whereas this Treaty had to be unclear. It is a success."

Finally, Jean Claude Juncker - Prime Minister of Luxembourg, reported in the Daily Telegraph on July 3 2007, said: "Britain is different. Of course there will be transfers of sovereignty, but would I be intelligent to draw the attention of public opinion to this fact?"

We should leave the EU and get out of it – as fast as we can!

Stan Parr
Pershore

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

jim h

Have now e-mailed all Crossbencher and Lib Dem peers who have e-mails ( about 100) as they are the ones to concentrate on . I assume most Conservative and labour peers will follow their leaders' instructions.

Tony Bennett

Several replies coming in to us in response to the letter sent by CREC to all 747 current members of the House of Lords. Here's one:

--------------------------------------------

FROM BARONESS ANELAY


Baroness Anelay has asked me to thank you for your letter on the Lisbon Treaty.

I can assure you that we will be doing our very best to ensure that this House of Parliament at least stands by the promise to the British people that was given by all parties at the last General Election to have a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

We find it deeply shaming that the Labour and Liberal parties have so cynically dropped the pledge that they gave to secure election in 2005. No wonder there is such disillusionment with politics. This is a constitutional Treaty. It has a substantial effect on our capacity to make our own decisions.

To pretend otherwise simply insults the intelligence as William Hague time and again demonstrated in the debates in the Commons. The British people should be able to decide.

With many thanks again.

Claudia Copithorne

PA to the Leader of the Opposition and the Opposition Chief Whip
Opposition Whips Office

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tony Bennett

Here's another response to the CREC Letter to the Lords, this time from Liberal Democrat peer Lord David Alton:

--------------------------------------

FROM LORD ALTON TO CREC


Thank you very much for your letter about the Lisbon Treaty. I entirely agree that a referendum should take place on the Treaty.

At the time that Parliament approved the Maastricht Treaty I was one of the three sponsors of the campaign for a referendum (along with Margaret Thatcher and the late Peter Shore).

I argued that before such a significant step was taken, the public had a right to hear the arguments and that a referendum campaign would enable this to happen. As with Maastricht, there is a real danger that small elites are determined to push forward an agenda that does not enjoy public confidence.

I am one of those who would be opposed to leaving the EU but believe that a creeping movement towards a centralised, unified, European state should be strongly resisted.

I have a further reason for believing that the Lisbon Treaty should be subject to a referendum.

At the last General Election the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats committed themselves to a referendum on the proposed European constitutional treaty: that was a manifesto commitment. This was a point made by some of those MPs who rightly defied the imposition of a three line whip requiring them to abstain on the House of Commons vote for a referendum.

As with the recent decisions on the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill (by the Labour Party to impose a three line on the creation of animal human hybrid embryos and the Liberal Democrats to do the same on the "the need for a father" - neither of which, paradoxically, were commitments in their manifestos), this use of whipping suborns Parliament and subverts the role of MPs.

To renege on the manifesto commitment to hold a referendum, on the basis that the Lisbon Treaty and the constitutional treaty are not the same thing, simply will not wash.

240 of the 241 provisions that were in the constitutional treaty are in the Lisbon Treaty. To pretend that this is not the same thing smacks of cynicism and is a political sleight of hand. That will further diminish respect for our political leaders and undermine confidence in our democratic processes.

Thank you again for writing,

Yours sincerely,


David Alton
(Professor Lord Alton of Liverpool)
House of Lords,
London SW1A OPW

==============

Campaign for a Referendum on the European Constitution - visit our news pages

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aardvark

The saddest thing in Alton's letter is his reference to Peter Shore. Had Shore been PM instead of Callaghan I would suggest that we wouldn't be in this mess now. Shore had an honesty that many modern politicians would be very uncomfortable with.

__________________
When in Woking do as the Wokes do.

"I do not wish to form my opinions by thoughtlessly quoting others; I wish others to support their opinions by sensibly quoting me." Paul Wesson (Aardvark) 13th April 2008

eublues

Watched much of the debate last night on BBC Parliament. Some good speeches for a referendum and against the treaty (Willoughby de Broke was excellent). Totally dumb arguments from the other side.

steve fowler

Yes i watched it too and i was glad to hear that one of the lords that spoke said he had got hold of the treaty of Lisbon and tryed to read it but he had NO idea what it was all about so atleast he has try to undestand it where as the europhile career lords just gave the normal the EU is good for us bit.

__________________
RULE BRITANNIA BRITANNIA RULES THE WAVES, BRITONS NEVER EVER SHALL BE SLAVE'S.

Never give in - never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.
Winston Churchill.

When Labour won the 1997 General Election, Enoch Powell told his wife that the electorate had voted to break up the United Kingdom.