Thread: Will some one get rid of Ken Clark today. What an idiot he is.

Originally Posted by angelman

Cameron is leader of the Tory party. He is not the Tory party. Surely he should have been able as leader to form a consensus that all the Tories could have followed, rather than his own view (or is that being unfair?).

I think you are actually being unfair. I think DC had a position agreed (ie the referendum before further transfers of powers) but now a number in his party want to change things and go for a referendum anyway.

There are so many of the tories obsessed by europe they lose sight of other big issues. Incredibly difficult to manage when they are prepared to bring the govt down to get what they want.

Sure there would have had to have been compromises from both sides, but surely some sort of common direction would have been better than the tug-of-war we have at the moment? As you say, Major had this problem, and that is why I say Cameron has been foolish over this. It was bound to come up yet again, but he has not found that common path that the Tories could go down.

Once the tory euro sceptics get going, it's just downhill all the way. If he gives into them, he has the liberals and the tory euro phobes to deal with and they are just as mad the other way. An impossible situation.

As for 2015 - understood. I agree that it would be better to look at things when all has calmed down a bit. I am not sure that we will ever be given a referendum on an in-out basis, as the politicians know the mood in this country. In all honesty, I don't think we really want an "in-out" question which leaves no room for anything else. I would give a 3rd option. "EU - yes", "EU - no" and "EEC". I think that there would be a significant proportion of people who would like an EEC and I think that I would probably on the face of it, vote yes to that.

But the UK doesn't have the means to change the EU rules. There is always this call by politicians and the media for the current UK PM to tell the EU this or that. We are already signed up to a set of rules. We can not change them unilaterally.

So realistically we only have an IN or OUT choice. I just wish we could agree on one of them and accept it rather than constant backwards and forwards. It is such a waste of time.

The same old arguments are coming out as they had last time they were in power, with Clarke being involved back then as well. Why Cameron didn't get rid of him, God only knows - maybe he thought that he would be easier to handle if on the front benches. It was fairly obvious that KC would take this stance - he always has, he always will.