A promise is a promise at the end of the day.The trouble with a great deal of the comments who are obviously pro Treaty is that they are without honour or common decency.

Robert Boyd, Derby, Derbyshire

to scorsbee of fulda, germany:

the british have ancient and tangible rights involving life, liberty, and property that pre-date the existence of most member nations in the presently composed e.u., or indeed the e.u. itself. the people of the united kingdom have been happily availing themselves of these rights in their islands when others, with french and german sounding names, were bringing under subjugation vast swathes of continental europe. as people with such a long history of rights, and the free exercise thereof, they are understandably reluctant to rely on fly by night treaties to give voice to those protections.

c. scott maxwell, alexandria, LA, USA

Any chance of a pro-Union view in this US owned paper?

I say hats off to you Lord Brittan, an enlightened Tory.

Labour were stupid to promise a referendum in the first place: it was never going to be fact based. They now realise their error, so lets move on.

The European Union is the most positive and inspiring part of England to-day, without it we would be just a dull back water subservient to the USA with no say in the EU.

Get real, join in, stop opting out, and enjoy the Union!

Peter Goddard, Le Rouret, France, EU

"...preventing the Charter of Fundamental Rights itself creating justiciable rights in the UK." Can someone explain to me why Britains see Fundamental Rights as something negative?! You, the people, should raise up against a government preventing you from your FUNDAMENTAL Rights, shouldn't you?

This is a serious question and I would be grateful if someone answers it =)

Scorsbee, Fulda, Germany

Clearly this is the Times' April Fool story.

emerson, chester,

Now perhaps the whole debate can be put to rest and those who haven't read the Treaty and are calling for a one question referendum on it can pretend quietly to themselves that the world is not interdependent and can now stop flag -waving and UKIPing around. It evidently takes the Lords to bring some order into this debate demanding sensible amendments but accepting the sense of most of the Treaty.

Leon, Tavistock,

I have to agree with contributors
Donna Walker, Effingham
jim, swindon
Robert Firth, Singapore
The issue here really isn't about an EU treaty, a constitution or indeed membership. All of the major political parties quashed discussion of these issues before the last general election by promising a referendum. Daft idea I think - but that was the deal. How do we now punish those politicians who have reneged?

Ron M, Aberdeen,

Brittan: "it would be piquant, to put it very mildly, for an unelected House to seek to impose a referendum, the ultimate manifestation of populist democracy, where the elected House has declined to do so".

Is it not even more "piquant" if the ultimate manifestation of populist democracy is not granted when it was presented as a manifesto policy contributing to bringing the incumbent members to the elected House?

Methinks you're having a laugh Leon; resignation as Secretary of State over the Westland affair, part of mass resignation of EU commissioners amidst fraud accusations, elevation to the Lords - to which I certainly can't remember electing you - do not qualify you to preach to us about our democratic rights. I sense an ivory tower.

Mike L, Chippenham, Wilts

Lord Leon Brittan, a massive beneficiary of the corrupt EU gravy train, is suggesting that the EU is a good thing? Well who'd have thought it?

If the Lisbon treaty really IS as good for us as he claims, then why is he so afraid of fighting for the Lisbon treaty in a referendum campaign?

The people of the UK were promised a referendum by the top 6 parties in the last election. Labour promised it solely as a means to prevent the EU from being an election issue. That being the case, the people have been denied a say at all since 2001 on the EU as this, uniquely, has been removed from the list of policies that people had been given a say on in the election. Labour were saying in 2005, do not vote against us on the EU issue as you can vote labour, and still get your say on the EU in a referendum. This was the most cynical lie ever, well next only after the lie about WMD.

Stop patronising us, and give us what we were promised. OUR REFERENDUM!

Ken Hall, Barrow in Furness, UK

And the changes to the Immigration rules and laws justify not a single mention. Duplicitous at best, misleading at worst.

Glenn, wales,

Lord Brittan supporting a referendum on the constitution/treaty (to which the outcome would be a resounding no) would be akin to a turkey enthusing about Christmas. As many have said here, we were PROMISED a referendum; polls show a big majority still want one. New Labour should HONOUR its word (if that isn't too naive a suggestion to make to a political party). The vast majority of us do not have our snouts in the EU trough; we're just the ones whose money is used to finance it , without any say whatever over what it does.

That's democracy for you.

anne, bournemouty,

Leon Britton is just another Tory reneging on Manifesto promises like one Ken Clarke. Was he not an EU Commssioner or was some other post.

QUESTION: IF HE HELD AN EU POST WOULD HE LOSE HIS EU PENSION IF HE VOTED FOR A REFERENDUM?

Surely someone knows?

Surely if he has such an vested interest, he and others like him (such as - what's his name the Welsh Windbag - forget is name ) should not be allowed to vote?

M. Cawdery, Portadown, Co. UK, EU.

Brittan is conflating two separate issues - whether the constitution is good for Britain, and whether we should be given a say in it as promised. He seems to suggest that only opponents of the constitution want a referendum. If the case for extending Europe's powers in Britain is so strong, it should not be hard to get the result he wants in a referendum. Most importantly, a referendum on the constitution (which is to all intents and purposes the same as the treaty) was promised. To deny one now simply confirms politicians as arrogant, dishonest and elitist.

Nick Beard, Rotherham, UK

The article misses the point in this debate. Whether the treaty is supposedly good or bad (I personally believe the first) for the UK is not the issue. This government promised a poll, so they have to keep that promise. This is the only thing to argue about. The merits of the treaty could be explained in the campaign preceding the poll.

Adrian, London, UK

I have always respected Leon Brittan for his intelligence and integrity. He has been a true servant of this country. So, although I am a strong Euro sceptic, I must listen to people such as him. I tend to agree with his views on referenda - but we are, tiny step by tiny step, being increasingly tied into a system from which there is no return. And, furthermore, is creating conditions where it will have, in the future, the ability bring more powers to itself unilaterally I believe he acknowledges in his article that referenda are legitimate in these circumstances - where the sovereignty of a country is the point at issue. There is strong case, that given these conditions alone, that a referendum should be held.

brian kelly, Reading, Englan

The opacity of the treaty is striking. This lack of clarity proceeds from the failure on the part of the member states to agree what the EU should, and should not, be for.

With no agreement on this matter, the treaty has to be left vague - to allow any one of multiple constructions to be applied to it later. (Witness Sarkozy's insertion of clauses to allow the EU to promote economic protectionism at a later stage.) This makes the treaty enabling legislation allowing the powers of the EU to grow in future.

This is to invert the purpose of a constitution, which should be to constrain rather than to reinforce power. Politicians won't risk a referendum because the public understands this better than they do and is sensible enough not to sign important legal documents whose ramifications are not entirely clear.

That said, it would be undemocratic for the UK to impose its will on the rest of Europe. That is why the referendum should be Europe-wide. And I doubt you'd win that either

George, London,

God help us from yet another "informed" globalist.

jono, canaries, spain

"Today the Bill ratifying the Lisbon treaty comes before the House of Lords, having comfortably surmounted all its hurdles in the Commons."

With an opening line that is such a blatant distortion of the truth, we can safely assume that the rest of this article offers a balanced account of the benefits(?) of the EU Constitution, to give it it's original, accurate and honest title.

Glenn, wales,

Not much chance of being published but Try, Try, Try again to get a democratic vote on the Constitreaty.

Lord Brittan is an ex-EU Commisioner and if he votes against the EU by agreeing to a referendum he would lose his substantial EU pension. This encumbrance should disqualify him from voting along with all other holders of EU pensions. They would clearly be grossly biased!

M. Cawdery, Portadown, UK (if it now exists)

To quote Mandy Rice-Davies "Well he would say that wouldn't he?"

John Savage, Toronto, Canada

The vote reflected just how removed Parliament, and much of the media, was from the electorate.

Brown's refusal to hold a referendum on the EU re-treaty simply highlights his appalling lack of understanding of what our country wants and stands for.

An EU referendum has been totally, wilfully ignored.

Brown's Stalinist intransigence, despite the reports of the Common's Foreign affairs committee and the Labour dominated select committee which seemed to agree with the majority of this country, namely that we do want a referendum, illustrates just how far we have moved towards a totalitarian State, where the will of the majority means nothing to Left-Wing politicians and those like Mr. Brittan who " know best".

This is mirrored by the Brussels " elite".

The patronising, revealing Left-wing Marxist arguments in Parliament, along the lines that the electorate does "not understand", exemplify the massive gulf that exists now between the "People" and those like Brittan and Brown.

Paul Butler, Reading, UK

The EU was created by the International Banking Cartel as a device to create a regional currency which would bring any individual country in Europe with its own currency into the Euro, the currency which THEY, create and control. THEY dictated that the Euro would be introduced without wage and price freezes, to purposely double and triple the prices and profits of goods and services. It is THEY, the secretive "investors" who own Unilever, The Oil Companies, the majority of food producing land in Europe etc. and are dictating the current massive price rises. It is THEY who dictated that no referendum be allowed concerning the 2nd try to institute the European Constitution THEY are orchestrating the current world financial crisis. Don't believe it? Check out the internet film "The Money Masters" on Google. Then close down the Bank of England. Print and distribute your own £. Break your treaties with the EU. Save your nation.

victor compton, Cherbourg, France

Lord Brittan States:

"I am, however, in principle opposed to referendums, as they are incompatible with representative parliamentary government, the true hallmark of the British constitutional system."

This may be true if the British Government were truly representative of the electorate's views, but sadly this is no longer the case, and lack of any meaningful difference between parties makes it impossible to express a view on matters such as the EU at the General Election.

If however he believes that the Government's stance on the Lisbon Treaty is truly representative, he will have nothing to fear from a referendum, as surely the electorate will vote "yes" as well.

ST 1, Essex, England

I have little doubt that those urging a referendum in order to have a "reasoned debate" have no intention of listening to the cases for and against as most of them are already so anti-EU that their real agenda is complete withdrawal. Their minds are already made up. They certainly don't seem to want to listen to Leon Britten's comments.

Neil, Lincoln,

Leon Brittan, wahtever his current office or title, is, at the last, a politician. Any recommendation of a politician will be tainted by personal and party interest, since that is why they went into politics in the first place - to push a personal agenda.

As for the statement that referenda are "incompatible with representative parliamentary government", that government is mandated on promises made in a manifesto. When an exception to that manifesto occurs or the government changes its manifesto (mind) then a referendum or an election should be mandatory in any true democracy.

But then, Leon Brittan doesn't have to stand for re-election, does he?

KR, Stockport,

Lord Brittan and Gordon Brown can't win the argument so they want to prevent the debate.

G.Hampton, Newark, England

Non elected members saving our bacon - now there's a turn up for the books !!!

Ian Payne, WALSALL,

The UK can decide it is simply a State of the EU with limited autonomy. In the event that a referendum is not allowed it would seem unreasonable for the UK to continue to lecture other countries within the world community about democratic process. It will certainly confirm to Australians the need to get on with the process of becoming a Republic and removing ourselves from the farcical Commonwealth.

John , Melbourne,

Sorry people you are all living in cloud cuckoo land.

If the Lords reject this then the commons will just push it through and ignore the house of Lords, this is why they have progressively taken power away from this institute.

The political classes have a vested interest in the EU as they make huge monies and if they don't like any laws they just claim that it is the EU that makes them.

I for one am not sure if the constitution is good for us or not but would appreciate our leaders sticking by their promises and at least giving us a proper debate with facts.

joe, Edinburgh, Scotland

No Sir; it’s another case of drip drip towards some politicians utopian dream without the consent of the electorate. Since the conception of the European Economic Union, we have not been consulted about any other EU development – and this is despite a specific promise from our shambolic leadership to hold a referendum. The electorate and politicians are drifting further and further apart; not to hold a referendum, will simply increase the gap to a chasm. This can only be unhealthy for democracy and the UK. And let’s not forget the EU accounts and the untraceable millions with accountant refusing to sign-off the accounts – you want us to continue to sign up to this nonsense? No!

Peter Hodge, Lagos, Nigeria

Lord Brittain is entitled to his opinion about the Lisbon Treaty - but so is the rest of the electorate. He is ignoring the fact that the electorate were promised a Referendum by all three major parties at the last election, and the Government was elected on that basis.

If he, and the rest of the Government, really think that the Treaty is good for Britain they should argue their case and pursuade the British people of it's merits. It is not acceptable to promise a Referendum and then renege on it because 'having read the new document WE think it will be good for the country.' It's not YOUR country - it's OURS. We should have the right to decide. If your Government held the Referendum and made a strong case for the Treaty, I'd listen. But you're not doing that and you have no right to decide for us.

Donna Walker, Effingham, Surrey

So the EU lets us keep the Common Law - that`s nice.

Peter Bolt, Redditch, UK

i believe mr brittain receives a pension from eu and cannot criticize eu without jeopardizing his pension. this is the corruption endemic in unelected eu

terry sullivan, morden,

Hasn't Lord Brittan done enough damage already with his euro-fanaticism? I'm scarcely able to contain my anger, as this country is slowly being rubbed out by what I am tempted to call treasonous transference of power away from the British people to a pan-european elite intent on ordering us all about and to what end?

Dr J Findlater, Carnforth,

Leon Brittan doesn't think a referendum is justified, but he is missing the point, a referendum was promised by all the major parties and that promise has been broken by Brown, and whether he thinks such a referendum is justified is immaterial.
If he thinks such promises in manifestos are meaningless, then he will not be surprised when the vote drops yet again at the next election.
He presumably doesn't want a referendum because he does not think the British people can be trusted to come up with the 'right' answer.

jim, swindon, uk

In three words, my Lord: pacta sunt servanda.

The Labour party made an explicit and unequivocal promise to the people that they would hold a referendum. They have broken that promise. It seems to me that the Lords not only should hold them to their promise, but have a clear constitutional duty to do so.

Robert Firth, Singapore,

Why wont you understand that the people want a say, you have a vested interest where I at age 43 have never been asked do I want to be in and more importantly pay for it.
There will be trouble over this do you perhaps remember poll tax?

Mitch, Wolverhampton, England

Those that want a referendum only want it because they think they would win. I wonder if it was the case if it was the reverse.

The real issue is that of the direction of the european union and the UK's place within it. The question is whether Britain wants to play a constructive role and have a say in a broader project that it can directly influence; or whether we are content playing second fiddle to the United States - which hasn't listened to us in the past and is unlikely to do so in the future.

Do we want to want to be part of a broder european project and reap the reards, or do we want to go down with the American ship.

There is a lot of hypocricy in this regard. Opponents of the EU generally are for greater ties to the US. Yet we have no say with them. Our trade ties are bigger with Europe and so is our future. Those that oppose the streamlining of the EU are essentially anti-development and anti-Britain.

They lack vision.

For once our mp's have some foresight.

RMM, crewe,

Mr Btittain, whether you think that the referendum is good or bad for Britain is entirely irrelevant in isolation. You may be right but I happen to hold a different point of view - that it is an unmitigated disaster that will render Britain even less liveable than it is today. We must have a referendum, with the cases for and against properly articulated, so that all our views in this important but contentious issue are properly heard. The political class has manifestly demonstrated that its judgment is utterly unreliable in almost every respect.

Billy Barnett, HK,

In the absence of any proper scrutiny of legislation in the Commons the Lords are the only protection that we have from Brussels diktats and an underqualified incompetent executive.

Bernard, Midlothian, Scotland

The maxim pertains: if in doubt, say no. Politicians and the media have not taken the trouble to explain the pros and cons to the public. In a situation of general ignorance (myself included) where only specialists have the time to interpret 287 pages of turgid documentation, is it reasonable to take it for granted that the Lisbon Treaty is beneficial, or must the electorate defer to the wisdom of Parliament? That is why a referendum is essential as it would give protagonists and antagonists an opportunity to state their respective cases.

Dwight Vandryver, Scholar Green, Cheshire, UK

We should have a refereendum, and say no !

John, Wakefield, Yorkshire /GB

So it is true that leopards don't change their spots,

They don't even modify them, not even when the're in the wrong habitat.

Frank H, London.,

I want out of a system about which I have not been consulted, where I elect people who have NO VOTE on the laws that are passed, where they are made largely by foreigners, and where they are all socialists. Good God, a socialist Britain has always been a disaster. I dread to think of the consequencies of a socialist Europe. I guess it would be something like a stew made from bits of China, parts of the USSR, a lump of Cuba, and some African and South American titbits: just like curry, a recipe for chronic indigestion. But I am also heartily sick of our own system! May I through your auspicious pages suggest an annual "British Referendum of Approval" of the antics of our own British Government, failure of which would trigger an immediate general election, enabling us to dismiss incumbent dimwhits without the need to wait for five years!

John Lee, Ellesmere Port, UK

If one starts out with the belief that the EU is a Good Thing, then the latest fixes to try to make the white elephant work are OK.

But when they are seen as trying to streamline a massive bloated beaurocracy and take power away from the monolithic construction you may join the majority in wishing the EU was over.

Trade agreements can be covered by a trade agreement.
Military matters can be covered by a military alliance.
Countries can pin their countries to each others' currencies.

None of this requires the EU, or the masses amounts of waste that goes with it. That the very capital itself has to move is an example of how the idea preceeded the implementation.

Often the EU doesn't agree - and why should it? We are NOT all the same, not everyone has the same views on issues.

A loose federation on simple common values would be a place to start rather than the mess that only now tentative steps are bieng made to try and improve.

Richard, London, England

"Does the Lisbon treaty involve a substantial transfer of power from the UK to EU institutions? On any fair analysis the answer must be an unequivocal No"

.Absolute rubbish!!!,, this is simply not true, we want a say, we wish to be consulted and exercise our democratic right to vote in a referendum as was originally promised.

The Lords thank God have the power to put this to the test and give the people of this country a say in what is a very important fundamental change that potentially and radically affects their lives for a very long time. So a referendum is absolutely essential.

Leon Brittain is living on a typical MEP's planet and nothing less.

MikeL, Manchester, UK

Very appropriate that this man's article is published on April 1st.

John Tomlinson, Brentwood, Essex

To argue that an unelected House should not "impose" a referendum is ridiculous, when a referendum is what is wanted by so many. The House of Lords should ensure that a treaty that is seen to be a constitution in all but name is brought before the people of this country. That is what the current government promised in their election manifesto, and the Lords must face up their responsibility - that sadly entails keeping honest this scurrilous Labour government.

tim holden, budleigh salterton,

MISTER Brittan is fooling no one!
All blinkers have been removed, the gloves are off, and all sane people in Britain are ready to fight for their right to a referendum!
What a stupid old fool Mr Brittan is!

Doreen, Leominster,