The founding members of the EU saw the formation of a union of
European countries as a bulwark against nationalism and war.
The irony is that having gone so far without democratic approval and now actively avoiding referenda the union will collapse into civil war at some point as peoples band together to fight a
monstrous dictatorship. Such an idea may seem far fetched right now but how else can freedom be regained once lost to faceless and unaccountable powers ?

Colbeck-Welch., jersey, CI,

The most disturbing element of Mr Blair's refusal to hold a national referendum on any new Treaty proposals is his rejection before any details of these are known, thus imposing a faith accompli.
Secondly, it is not enough to argue as he does that a referendum is not required if the proposals are relatively minor and containing no radical change to the UK's relationship with the European Union of a constitutional order.
The plain fact is that after 32 years of EU membership it is the accumulated provisions and weight of all the treaties signed by successive British governments which have fundamentally undermined our own Constitution.
if the new proposals still include the provision "EU law shall have primacy over the law of member states" then clearly the point will have been reached when any British government must decide whether Britain is to remain a Parliamentary democracy, or merely a vassal state of the new United States of Europe.

mr graham wood, york, north yorkshire

Is the government of this country to be by "common consent" at Westminster or by "plea bargaining" in the EU ?
No matter what or how the gloss is put upon it,that remains the question to be answered.
It is of course that question that career politicans of all EU member states will evade and avoid now and forever.
I would suggest that you,Mr Rees Mogg,and your fellow movers and shakers have one last duty to perform.
Expose the nonsense masquerading as a United Europe once and for all.

Peter Bolt, Redditch, UK

Does the water always have to be up to the eyes of the English before they do anything?

I have lived in Brussels five years. Attacks on our sovereign rights here are everyday. The resistance offered by all the British MEPs at best can be compared to Dunkirk rather than D-day.

As an Englishman and a Catholic, I attend Mass tonight for the Feast of St George 400 yards away from the European Parliament. Perhaps he will do something effective. Nobody else is.

Christopher Gillibrand, Brussels in exile, Belgium

The referendum in France and Holland showed that the constitution was not acceptable to the people of Europe. So, the Commission and Merkel think that a constitutional treaty will give them the powers of the constitution without referenda. Blair will go along with it partly because he cares nothing about the freedoms of the British people but also because of the elegance of arranging the socialist transformation of the UK by subsuming it under the socialist EU with so few of the UK establishment understanding how it was done.

R Mason, London, UK

EU has to be a loose federal body instead of trying to make a bureaucratic Europe. Every nation has its own unique problems and solving them. Here one shoe fits all does not work.

Besides a centralized and bureaucratic EU will be just like a useless debating society like UN wasting every nation’s resources and energy.
Regards,

Krishna R. Kumar, Udupi, India

If the British Constitution means anything then it means that there is more powerful backing for its Acts than ordinary Parliamentary Acts. The only obvious means is a referendum perhaps requiring a majority of the electorate (not just the votes) of a certain percentage.

It is not sufficient to include Constitutional changes in a manifesto as politicians have shown they are not honest enough. They also often want the same thing at the expense of the electorate such as greater power or greater taxation.

As it stands Parliament can vote for absolute power and abolish elections as long as it has made sure the people are unable to physically resist it.

Brian Gilbert, Hampton, Middx

Are socialists so convinced of the moral rightness of their views that democratic principles should not be allowed to impede them? Or is the answer less gradiose and Blair simply sees the EU as the location for his new career?

Steve, Odessa, Ukraine

Maintaining global competitiveness will the key challenge facing the EU as we enter the 21st century. Does Chancellor Merkel believe that the best and most efficient structure to face such a challenge is a growing " over-centralised and over- bureucratised " EU ?

Surely, a 20th century political body, ruled by 19th century bureaucrats , can not be expected to meet an urgent 21st century imperatives, namely , fostering a climate supportive of adaptable , fast responding, entrepeneurial economies .

At present , Chancellor Merkel seems content with the opposite.

Enrique Hugo Bargioni, Miami Beach , Florida, USA

The EU is, once again, making it absolutely clear that it knows what it wants and is determined to have it, regardless of what the people think.

We too know full well what the EU wants - a single country called Europe, with all significant control of every aspect of our lives passed to the EU and nationa parliaments redundant.

It has been absolutely clear since the we realised what the EU wants that we do not want it.

What else could anyone n eed to know? Is it not perfectly obvious that we have to leave, while we still can?

Idris Francis, Petersfield,

There should be free trade and Britian should pull out of the EU.

Not that the Euros will ever allow such a thing to happen,

Neil Murphy, cromer,

The history of the twentieth century demonstrates what can happen when there is no democracy. In the Soviet Union 50 millions died, in Fascist Germany we had the six million victims of the holocaust, in Communist China 70 millions died.

Parliamentary democracy is too precious to abandon. Angela Merkel's wishes to build a United States of Europe can only be achieved by ignoring the wishes of the peoples of Europe. The French people and the Dutch people voted 'No'. If the Germans and the British were asked, they would also vote 'No'.

Frank McGarry, Lyme Regis, England, UK

It would be good to have a proper and grown up debate about the future of the United Kingdom in Europe with both sides showing the positives and negatives of membership on this great country.

If there is to be a new treaty let us debate the reason why it's needed, the impact of the proposed treaty on the UK and finaly let the great British public decide, that's democracy in action!

Alexander, Shrewsbury, England

Is the British government a nonelected body? Are you advocating giving the elected European parliament more democratic substance? Or is all this talk about democratic legitimacy and bureaucratic centralisation only disguising the fact that you dislike the European project altogether? Your European project is little more than the outdated European Free Trade Agreement.

H. Haubert, Merzig, Germany

Membership of the EU costs us a tad over one percentage point of GDP a year. It is very hard to see that this outlay is generating any particular return. For all the hogwash spoken about Europe, our economy has grown at a smidge over 3% per annum over the past 15 years, well below the US and other developed economies outside the EU, but about par for the course for the bigger EU states. So, it's a waste of money, it's strangling our economy, it buries in red tape and we aren't benefitting from it in any other way. What is the EU for? It's time to get out.

Mike James, London,

The European Union has a democratic deficit. This is easy to fix; the people of Europe must be able to directly elect both the European Commission and the European President. Without these reforms the European Project is doomed.

Ray Frowd, Cambridge,

What is the point of allowing people to have voting rights for the EU? Voting rights imply that the voters have a real choice about the course and progress of the EU. The reality is that the course of the EU has never been defined in the slightest by people’s votes. People’s votes are unwanted because they do not arrive at the same answer as politicians wish to impose.
The moral solution is to remove voting rights for ordinary citizens instead of continuing the pretence that the EU is a democracy where the people’s views have any importance.

Derek Emery, Bedworth, UK

The people of Britain fought among themselves and with outside forces to secure and maintain democracy over many centuries.

Undeniably the more removed from the People a government is, the less well it serves them and the more self-serving it becomes.

The EU has many benefits but back door republicanism descending into oligarchy where Britain and other nations are ruled by a select elite "we know best what is good for you" is not one of them.

The EU must primarily be an association for trade and common interests. That does not require a Parliament - particularly one which has little popular support and is nomadic at vast cost to taxpayers, legal jurisdiction beyond areas of common interest, a hoard of unelected, richly rewarded officials "proposing" and insinuating upon us what meets their own tastes and narrow views, in order to justify their existence.

Give us back our local democracy!

John Bowman, Sarlat, France

I think England should simply leave the EU. Europe is also tired of a member which is not happy in, nor out, always wanting special treatment or special ways, always complaining. Just call it a day! This is a free Europe, no hard feelings.

Andreas Schultheis, Barcelona, Spain

Tony Blair ought to fall on his sword,because he's more than useless.He is selling out this Country.This is the man who wouldn't
give up any of our rebate. And then did just that..

A Walton, Leiceater, England

Euroscepticism will be the end of the Tory party.

Robert, London,

Blair is second to no-one in his haste to defer to everyone...except in the case of the British people.

Martin Morrow, Sheffield, MA, USA

If the EU is responsible for 84% of our legislation and Wetminster only 16%, why do we need so many MPs at Westminster? Given how little they now have to do, why can we not reduce the number of Westminster MPs by, say 50%? This would give considerable savings to taxpayers that could, for example, be used for improving schools and hospitals.
David Craig
Author: "Plundering the Public Sector"

david craig, london, uk

Firstly the British should clean up their own backyard before preaching democracy to the rest of Europe - cash for honours, the BAE scandal, increasing govt centralisation and ever more quangos. Secondly they should stop whinging about how beastly the EU is. Thirdly respect the different forms of democracy in Europe, for example the federal system in Germany. Fourthly stop over simplifying, for example claiming that 84% of German legislation is EU instigated, when the legislation is actually approved in the first place by the council of ministers. Really Rees Mogg should be ashamed of such manipulation of facts. And finally, of course Merkel wants a constitution , Germany has one, how can she say no! And guess who gave this to Germany. Good lord it was the British and the Americans. So what is sauce for the goose,,,etc....etc

John Walter, Bonn , Germany

"The electorate should hold Labour to that promise, or make it pay a heavy price in votes."

How do we hold the EU bureaucracy to account when all three of the main parties are europhilic to greater or lesser extent? It is not just Labour that is the problem here but the Conservatives too. Red Heth got us into the EEC (as it was then called), Margaret Thatcher made noises but agreed the Single European Treaty, John Major signed the Maastricht Treaty. What would Cameron do if faced with a new European Constitution? On past form he too would sign on the dotted line.

Time to emigrate to Australia if you can!

Adrian Gilbert, Tonbridge, England

Shirley in Canada.... de Gaulle vetoed Briatain's application not because he thought us non european, but because he thought (right;y, i suspect) that the UK would never allow the CAP to be implemented in its current form, hence pouring millions of pounds in subsidies to French farmers.

And I note that you don;t criticise France and the Netherlands and think they should leave the union - it was they, after all, who scuppered the Constitution, not the Brits. No one wants to seriously see the UK leave the EU - it needs our money and it's too risky to see a major economy survive outside and hence shatter the illusion that we all need this economic bloc. It would be the start of the finish perhaps.

Last thing, Shirl, if you are going to spout anti- British bile, at least be honest about it being exactly that.

Stuart Murray, Amsterdam, Netherlands

"It's time for the Brits to leave us". Who? Canada? Are they in the EU?
Most Britons criticise the EU because it is non-representational and inefficient in government. Most also see the necessity for it to develop, but not in the way that was set out on the constitution. It was too bureaucratic, centralised and socialist for most Britons' palate.
As for your inferred love of continental Europe, and clear dislike for the Anglosphere; I suggest you move to Quebec.

Nick White, Edinburgh, UK

Shirley you seem to be ok enjoying the fruits of the Anglosphere?

tom, Sydney, Australia

Could you give even one example of how the planned new Treaty would increase centralisation? You couldn't because it doesn't. It does the reverse in fact, eg by improving the voice of national parliaments. tell the truth, plase. You're not opposed to this Treaty. You're opposed to the EU. You would withdraw and leave Britannia naked before the world.

Mod, London,

I enjoyed Shirley's rant,although it is not at all clear whom or what she wants the British to leave. She seems to forget that the French electorate voted massively against the Constitution followed by an even more pronounced rejection in Holland.Labour promised a referendum in Great Britain and should honour that promise.
Shirley is lucky even if on a temporary basis to be in Canada,part of the North American Trade Area and in addition to be protected by U.S. armed might as part of NATO.
Anglosphere indeed!
Michael Henderson, Paris

henderson, paris, france

"Go now, join Oceania -- aka the Anglosphere -- led by America.

Shirley Jackson, Oliver, BC, Canada"

Yes British Columbia is in North America....if only were outside the EU too !

TomTom, Leeds, England

Charles de Gaulle was right when he vetoed Britain's application to join the European union. It's time for you Brits to leave us. Nobody takes seriously your criticism because we know you Brits want to stop the union from developing. Go now, join Oceania -- aka the Anglosphere -- led by America.

Shirley Jackson, Oliver, BC, Canada