No, the people aren t saying er, but there is a vocal faction who are bound by their narrow interest to say that and doubtless more. We are in Europe, we are part of Europe, get over it. Outside Europe we would still be subject to European decisions without say in them, and as for being taken over by unelected bureaucrats, if that is the case, then for the people it is no change. We have always been governed by unelected bureaucrats but nobody cares to point this out. These particular unelected bureaucrats are more likely to be governing in the interest of the people because of the increased spread of interest. The privileged classes may be peeved at the erosion of their advantage but since when has the people been concerned about them?

Henry Percy, London, UK

Indecision over a topic as important and consequential as Britain's membership of the EU means going with the tide wherever it may take us. This is no way for a responsible and independent nation state to conduct its affairs. A firm decision needs to made - yes or no.

Nizhinsky, England,

Contrarian Cambridge - half of the comments come from outside the UK? I counted 3 and this comment makes it 4.

Carry on, then

david Kay, Vevey, Switzerland

"So let’s get real. The loss of sovereignty by accepting majority voting on the colour of car steering wheels seems to be a small price to pay for peace in Europe"

That si so naive as to almost deserve living under the kind of government we now have,
The European Council( not the Council of Ministers) is our new government.it is unelected,unaccountable and cannot be removed. Everything now falls under the competence of the EC.The economy,immigration,trade,manufacturing,criminal justice,the EC even has powers to raise its own taxes.
No we are not confused,we are betrayed.

Peter, Manchester, England

We have been missing Hugo Young's analysis - Matthew Parris reminds us that the "er" is real. I'm convinced Steve from Colchester doesn't speak for everyone. But the unfortunate and messy referendum u-turns of last week mean we'll continue not to know how wrong he is!

Hugo, London, UK

Better schools. Better hospitals. Reduce tax..... all paid for by dumping the wasteful EU !! No confusion there !

Dave , Swindon, Wilsthire

The real and only confusion exists solely within the Euro loving elite inside the UK
The confusion is this;
How can they tell the truth about the monsterous Hydra being created in Brussels ?
How can they admit having made a utter mistake ( very difficult for the middle classes : Lib Dems in particular) ?
Can they obfuscate enough without actually admitting they were completely out manuovered by the European elite. ?
Finally, for them, the hardest task of all :
How do they face the increasing reality that the whole true extent of the nonsense called the European Union is almost on a weekly basis exposed as the fraud it is ?
The EU will not survive, sadly when it does collapse it will be with real dangers exposed.

Peter Bolt, Redditch, UK

You are accurate in your depiction of our verdict -'er'. Our politicians have reflected our dither, even though, bless, this comes as an outcome of political self interest, and expediency - anything but the wish to reflect our wishes. You are right - this state could go on for years, decades. The problem however, is that, while we dither, we are steadily and tacitly signing it all away. This is the non -sequitur in your argument. We would be justified in camping in the ante-room of Europe if only our commitment were equivalent to our state of mind. Curiously it is only on the euro that this match between wariness and hard outcome is accurate. We remain uncommitted to the Euro because we are uncommitted in our minds about our wholehearted membership of this Euro club. On virtually every other issue our clothes, our rights, our autonomy are being stolen piecemeal. We might be thinking 'er' but effectively we are mouthing 'I do' at the altar with inexorable and predictable consequences.

Donald Sammut, Bristol,

People should be given the right to decide. Yes , there are many grey areas and the wording of the referendum needs to be clear a concise. I personally am not opposed to some sort of membership of the EU, but I take great exception at the open borders and the fact that Brussels can dictate terms on issues such as law and order, civil rights and parental rights.

Hamad Lone, London, England

Matthew, go back to Parliament because with your mind set that is where you belong. As "confused" as the electorate may be, they still want a promised vote on the question of the EU. ITS THE VOTE, STUPID!
Obviously dictator Brown feels the Illuminati of Europe are more important then the voters of Britain. Now that is confusing?????????

Pauli, london,

I have long resisted those cynics who say that electoral apathy is justified because the voter really has very little influence; our 'representative' democracy is a travesty -we are mocked by our MPs. After the day of infamy March5 showed that promises to electors ae worthless I have joined the cynics, lost any respect I had for MPs -like our owm Geraldine Smith . What can we do?

Dr j findlater, carnforth,

Mike in Sydney is wrong. I didn't want a referendum. Nor did many people I know. So there was no "clear unanimity".

The reason I was against a referendum is that the debate in the UK has been hijacked by hysterical paranoia to such an extent that there is little chance of having a serious examination of the facts, as opposed to the press soundbites. A case in point is the claim that we have been "taken over by unelected bureaucrats". European laws are in fact adopted by the Council, which consists of the elected governments of the Member States, either on its own or, most commonly, jointly with the European Parliament, all of whose members are elected. How many people who scream "unelected bureaucrats" actually bothered to vote in the European Parliamentary elections?

Andrew, London (but temporarily away),

This is the second week you have been completely wrong.
The public may weel be confused over the EU but that was not the question - you are confusing the issue by introducing this.
It was about a single clear question: should there be, as promised in all manifestos' a referendum on the EU constitution? And the answer from Labour was quite clear NO.

Forget all the justifications; 'it's different' (Brown and his cohorts are the only ones in Europe who subscribe to this notion). We have our 'red lines'. Various Westminster committess have questioned the reality of these red lines.

Simply put they lied.
QED

John, Reading, uk

There is NO confusion with the public. We all do not want further integration and the politicians KNOW this. The confusion comes from politicians trying to decide how they IGNORE the public and implement their grand plan by stealth.

Steve, Colchester, UK

Matthew, It's so unlike you to be this out of touch with the people that on this occasion I really wonder if you wrote this yourself. I'm not at all confused about what I think of the European project. I want us to get out of the Union but also to do business with Europe. The other European countries will not stop wanting to trade with us just because we don't have British snouts in the trough in Brussels. Our MPs are not confused either. They are simply self-servers who vote according to what they or their families will get out of it.

Tam Earl-Aine, cheltenham,

There is no confusion, Matthew! We were promised a vote and then denied one, the politicians (with a few honourable exceptions who actually kept their word) lied. Simple as that!

MP, Nth Lincs, England

Here we go again, another prawn cocktail crisps crisis.

As a euroagnostic, I blame the EU for a substantial under supply of hospital and medical services, and a serious distortion of the manufacturing sector. Before the advent of the EU, and European Nations had their much valued sovereignty, I seem to remember that we regularly tried to wipe one another out. Consequently, there was a greater need for hospitals and armament production.

So let’s get real. The loss of sovereignty by accepting majority voting on the colour of car steering wheels seems to be a small price to pay for peace in Europe. I also suspect that many of us have a confused attitude to Europe because we are bombarded with the minutiae of the way that the EU is evolving, without the benefit of either a clear roadmap or a final destination.

I also find it a little bit strange that half the comments about this topic (the UK’s policy on the EU) seem to originate from contributors who choose to live outside the UK

Contrarian, Cambridge (UK),

You are accurate in your depiction of our verdict -'er'. Our politicians have reflected our dither, even though, bless, this comes as an outcome of political self interest, and expediency - anything but the wish to reflect our wishes. You are right - this state could go on for years, decades. The problem however, is that, while we dither, we are steadily and tacitly signing it all away. This is the non -sequitur in your argument. We would be justified in camping in the ante-room of Europe if only our commitment were equivalent to our state of mind. Curiously it is only on the euro that this match between wariness and hard outcome is accurate. We remain uncommitted to the Euro because we are uncommitted in our minds about our wholehearted membership of this Euro club. On virtually every other issue our clothes, our rights, our autonomy are being stolen piecemeal. We might be thinking 'er' but effectively we are mouthing 'I do' at the altar with inexorable and predictable consequences.

Donald Sammut, Bristol,

Only the politicians are confused, when the people voted in the 70’s it was to join a common market, this treaty is the constitution under another name and they promised us a vote on that. I don’t want an unelected, unaccountable pen pushing bunch of jobsworths laying down the law to me. The government we’ve got are bad enough without having to put up with euro liars as well.

Susan, Barry, S Wales

A referendum is a poor method of determining how people really think (if they know) since it is often used by voters to give the government a good drubbing, regardles of the question asked. Because of this, succesive governments have failed to pose the question to us, for a second time, as they have salami sliced more and more of our sovereignty into the European experiment. This ambivalence of the UK electorate results in Europe being changed by dishonesty and stealth because no mainstream UK leader has the courage to put the question in clear terms. And this question is not about the Lisbon Treaty but whether, having joined Europe on the basis of a referendum, we now wish to be part of a vastly changed Europe which would be unrecognisable to those who posed the question to us in the original referendum. But since the focus groups will never put Europe anywhere near the top of their worry lists why would any UK leader show political courage or integrity?

Graham McKean, Sevenoaks, UK

You are right about the 'Er' but wrong about the point here. All the main parties stood on manifestos promising a referendum. I am pro-european and would, on balance (but not without reservations) like to see the EU develop. But a referendum was promised. Simple.

The govt is shameful in its ditching of its promise. But at least there is some arguement to be had as to whether the 'Treaty' is different enough from the 'Constitution' which fell before it. I for one think it is not and that a referendum is still owed. Labour has no mandate on this issue: it promised to defer to the people on this issue, and as for the line-by-line scrutiny promised....

As for the LibDems, they have managed to score an own-goal from the penalty spot. Clegg's incompetence beggars belief. The principled action of an ostensibly pro-EU party would have been to push for the referendum promised. They, perhaps, could have triggered a govt defeat. How long will it be before Clegg has no front bench left?

nigel somerville, abingdon,

Parris thinks MPs should follow opinion, not lead it. If so they are useless and should be voted out until we get MPs capable of making decisions. Governments are, after all, expected to do that. They have access to information and expertise beyond the reach of electorates, which is why we allow them the privilege of representing us.

It seems the size of the decision is too big for the pygmies in Parliament, and the journalists who comment on them too.

Tapestry, Manila, Philippines

Of course the electorate is confused. In the space of a generation the UK has gone from being a world power (albeit a failing one) to a non-entity.
At the same time the European project has gone from being a pipe-dream of visionaries in a devastated Europe to the world's biggest economy, the world's business regulator and a burgeoning world power using economic rather than military power.
John Bull is no more and it can be hard to come to terms with that. The fact that Australia could convert to metric overnight but that the slow creep of metrification in the UK is accomanied by the 'save our lb' campaigns tells you everything.

Eddie Reader, birmingham, england

I believe the people must have a vote as this is the democratic way. I for one am totally anti Europe. For years we have been at war with the Europeans. They have tried endlessly to try and take our land. The only differance now is, they are doing it without having to even fire a shot!! Also, this country doesn't seem to be gaining anything from this brotherhood of the Belgium Empire! Infact, the only ones who seem to be gaining anything from this, are our old buddies the French. Its time England woke up and smelt the beans!

Andrew Balmbra, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Tyne&Wear

Brilliant as usual, Matthew. But ambivalence and doubt make us uncomfortable. The clarity of the closed mind always wins in popular appeal. You are too honest and too intelligent for most of us, but keep it up!

Peter Paul Hayes, Grantham, Lincs

If MPs really WERE confused about what the people want they should have read the newspapers and the Blogs. The People (88% of them, anyway) wanted the Referendum they were promised.

They wanted the Referendum so that they would be clearly told the case for (and against) the ConTreaty so that they could make an informed choice. That is what all three parties promised in their last election manifestos, but only the Conservatives honoured their promise. As a result the electorate STILL have not really been told the pro or con case for the Treaty, which is why the collective reaction seems to be 'err.' Until we are trusted to listen to the arguments and vote in a Referendum, things will never change.

You are right Matthew - it will come down to Trust. Labour and the LibDems have conclusively proven that they are not to be trusted.

Donna Walker, Effingham, Surrey

No Matthew.
The people are pretty clear on this; they would like to have a say but the politicians who all promised them one have reneged on the promise. Quite simple really - what are you having trouble grasping?

Jon Burgess, Douglas, Isle of Man

Matthew, you may be confused, but I am not. This treaty is an end to our democracy since we cannot vote to change a European government that already produces 80% of our laws. Just like in the old USSR where people voted for MP's in just one communist party.

Also, it reverses the Mastricht opt outs since our currency reserves are pooled into Europe irrespective of whether we still keep the pound. What is worse is that when the British people realise that we are being drained financially by Europe with no gain and decide to leave the EU, we cannot do so unless the other countries vote to let us break away which they cannot afford to do. Hence we are trapped by this Lisbon treaty.

Perhaps if the people were given the opportuntiy of the promised referendum on this near identical constitutional treaty, these matters would have been discussed.

George, London,

I remember the last referendum - the one that voted us into Europe. The people on the west coast voted "yes", despite it being obvious to a 10-year old that the effect on west coast ports would be devastating. The turkeys voted for Christmas. "The wisdom of crowds"? Maybe, and maybe that was a pig that just flew past my window.

Ken Leyland, Liverpool, U.K.

The Labour Party made a manifesto commitment to a referendum on the EU constitution and their only defence is that the Lisbon Treaty is not a constitution. However, the words of other EU leaders suggest that it is in fact very close to the (rejected) constitution. Problem!!

Before the House of Lords allows this to go ahead, we need to see the result of a genuine, broad-scale survey of the UK electorate asking "Do you accept/believe that the Lisbon Treaty is different to the previous constitution and is nothing more than a tidying up exercise". If the answer is "yes", I would be happy to let it pass. However, I suspect the answer is "no".

Surely you can't make a promise and then say that it doesn't count as you have decided it is different? I guess you can if you are a self-styled "moral leader" who talks tough to (poor)Zimbabwe but wants to be the European distribution depot for (rich) China. Politics is already grubby. This "sophistry" just compounds the break in trust.

Stephen Bell, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire

I think that "Mike" of Sydney has it exactly right. There is no confusion among the electorate, and there never has been, ever.

Back in 1970 they were offered a vote - amazingly a vote on a much less final step than today's, just imagine - when they were asked to say yes or no on the question of free trade and membership in a "Common Market". They were also promised in writing that this would not lead to political integration or loss of sovereignty. They voted 'yes'.

Since then the electorate have consistently been opposed to successive measures to betray that promise, and at each step along the way the Government of the day has ignored the voters.

Today they went a step further, by denying the voters a promised referendum.

We are not watching the politicians reflecting the "confusion" of the voters. We are watching the politicians deliberately flouting the will of the voters.

I hope that the politicians come bitterly to regret their actions. I look forward to it.

jon livesey, Sunnyvale, CA/USA

Mike has put is more succinctly and better than Matthew.

When the people sent these politicians to Parliament they believed that the promise of a referendum was genuine. Now they see that it was a cynical lie. The men they elected have deceived and betrayed them.

The situation now is not so much that of one party against another, but of Parliament versus the People.

Herbert Thornton, Victoria, Canada

The Euro project is sick, just what sort of great vision is it that has to be implemented by stealth? The hubris of the EU ambition is the direct descendant of Germany and French Euro Imperialism. They have realised they can't do on their own anymore so they'll do it together through politics. Britain is the patsy - they need our money but not our influence. Get out and get out now , there are no economic consequences.

Clive S , Crowborough, UK

Yes Matthew. Last week ,you would have us believe that the Speaker of the House of Commons is not accountable to the public at large.

This week you blame us for Brown his obligations and failure towards those who elected Blair (not Brown - he has no mandate whatsoever).

Will next week's column discuss whether or not the perpetrators of crime should be viewed as its true victims of unfortunate circumstance? What next?

As for the likelihood that the electorate will forget this treatment before Brown is forced into a general election - I think you are 100% wrong. Get out into the real world. Go down the pub (quick - before it is too late: remember they are all shutting as respnse to the ban on smoking - their core customers) and discuss you ideas with some real people, those not involved in journalism or politics.

Edwin, Bucharest,

All this glosses over the issue in question: ratification of the Lisbon "Treaty" - and on that there is clear unanimity amonst the population.

In fact the population is probably clear on the larger question - "yes" to doing business with other European countries, "no" to being taken over by unelected bureacrats.

Matthew, I think you are confused.

Mike, Sydney,