A group of Europe’s “wise men” has pronounced that the European Union treaty agreed by Tony Blair in June is substantially the same as the constitution rejected two years ago.

The elder statesmen’s verdict was seized on yesterday by critics who insisted that Gordon Brown must honour the Government’s promise of a referendum on the document.

The group, led by the former Italian Prime Minister Giuliano Amato, and including Lord Patten, the former Conservative minister and European Commissioner, concluded that the new treaty was only symbolically different to the proposed constitution rejected by French and Dutch voters in 2005.

The so-called Amato group’s assessment carries weight because the 16 senior politicians include two members of the convention that drew up the constitution – Mr Amato and Jean-Luc Dehaene, the former Belgian prime minister – as well as former leaders of the Netherlands, Finland and Greece.

It said: “The proposed new treaty and supplementary protocols take over almost all the innovations contained in the constitutional treaty. They only leave aside the symbolic changes which were introduced by the constitutional treaty – such as the title of the treaty or the symbols of the union.”

The Amato group was formed in 2006 to study the case for EU reform. The main objectives of the proposed treaty include ending the national veto on large areas of justice and home affairs policy. It also consolidates the representation of EU diplomacy into a single figure – the High Representative for Foreign Affairs. Both objectives were supported by the Amato group.

Thanks to opt-outs negotiated by Mr Blair, Britain can ignore justice and home affairs decisions, and will retain full control over its foreign policy. But the High Representative for Foreign Affairs will be able to speak for the EU at the United Nations.

The Amato group’s conclusions echo those of various European leaders, including the Spanish Foreign Minister, Miguel Angel Moratinos, who said that “the wrapping has been changed, but not the content”. Bertie Ahern, the Irish Taoiseach, also said: “Thankfully, they haven’t changed the substance – 90 per cent is still there.”

The treaty could be formally agreed by EU leaders as early as their next summit in October, which would begin a ratification process in all 27 member states.

The Conservatives yesterday renewed their call for a referendum as part of the British ratification. Mark Francois, the Shadow Europe Minister, said: “We have consistently argued that this new treaty is essentially the old EU constitution under another name and this influential group has now effectively confirmed this. Labour can simply no longer pretend that this is anything other than the revived constitution so they must honour their manifesto pledge and offer a referendum.”

Neil O’Brien, director of the Open Europe think tank, said: “Amato’s group consists of the people most intimately involved in the constitution process. They say that the new treaty is basically just the rejected European constitution in disguise, and they would know.”

He added: “The Government’s attempt to pretend that this is a different document has been exploded by other EU leaders admitting that it’s exactly the same. Now they are falling back on a ludicrous claim that Britain has signed a different treaty to other member states, which is just a fantasy.

“The Government say that it is different because the UK has various opt-outs and safeguards. But they are the same safeguards as in the original version, on which they promised a referendum.”

Mr Blair promised a referendum on the constitution in 2004 but the Government now insists that none is necessary because the idea of a constitution was dropped and Britain secured opt-outs from the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the extension of qualified-majority voting.

A Foreign and Commonwealth Office spokesman said: “Let’s be clear, the Reform Treaty is not the Constitutional Treaty – in form or content. The mandate says so in terms, ‘The constitutional concept, which consisted in repealing all existing Treaties and replacing them by a single text called Constitution, is abandoned’.

“There will be no transfer of power away from the UK on issues of fundamental importance to our sovereignty.”

A sense of déjà vu?

Sections 1 and 4 Reforms from these parts of the constitution are all transferred into the new treaty. They include a new EU foreign minister, a new full-time president of the EU council of ministers, and a big cut in national vetoes over decision-making in justice and home affairs

Section 2 This section of the constitution – the Charter of Fundamental Rights – is no longer included in full but incorporated and given legal force by a single paragraph. The charter will be published separately; a clause in the treaty exempts British law from following it

Left out The omitted parts of the constitution refer to the EU’s anthem and flag and the concept of a single constitution

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• What makes the perfect mum?
• To keep me stress-free, no more awareness days, please
• What do lottery winners buy?