ConHome goes Yes Prime Minister on Cameron

This might only be a spoof but someone at ConHome has Cowardly Cameron pretty much summed up ...

Memo

From: The Political Adviser to the Prime Minister

To: The Prime Minister

Date: 20/1/13

Confidential

EU Strategy

You asked for a brief summary of your EU strategy in advance of your speech later this week.

• The promise of an In/Out referendum under a Conservative Government late in the next Parliament will draw much of the poison that has plagued the party over the EU issue since Margaret Thatcher's Bruges speech - by making it clear to those MPs and party members opposed to EU membership that in such circumstances they will have an opportunity to campaign for a No vote.

• The pledge may not prevent UKIP from making advances in this year's County Council elections or indeed next year's European ones.  However, it will, in the different circumstances of the 2015 general election, help to squeeze UKIP's vote - since you will be able to argue that all voters will achieve by voting UKIP is to let Miliband, who is opposed to a referendum, into Downing Street.

• It may be that the next election does not return a Conservative majority in the Commons, but that you none the less continue as Prime Minister of a Coalition Government.  If this Coalition contains, as now, the Liberal Democrats, you will be in a position either to drop the referendum guarantee as part of a new Coalition Agreement if you wish, or to proceed with it if you wish and if our partners agree.

• However, it may be that the next election does indeed return a Conservative Commons majority, or you lead a Conservative minority Government - in which case a renegotiation can proceed.  We are agreed that it would be wiser to dine a la carte than table d'hote from the menu drawn up by Fresh Start and others, and that it is wise, given present uncertainties, not to be too specific about how much renegotiation you intend.

• The Cabinet has already been informed that its members will be required to support a Yes vote in the event of an In/Out referendum: I see that James Forsyth has reported this in the Mail on Sunday today.  As we correctly anticipated, Cabinet members opposed to Britain's EU membership will have calculated that the referendum is a long way away - indeed, that it may not happen - and thus will not resign, at least before the next election.

• This returns us to the subject of renegotiation.  Essentially, the main factors you will want to bear in mind in due course is a) How much our EU partners, in particular the German Government, want to be helpful; and b) How hard you wish to push in order to maximise your chances of winning the support of Euro-sceptic Cabinet members, MPs and party members.  As I say, we should wish at this stage to maintain maximum flexibility.

• It may of be that in these circumstances our EU partners do not want to be helpful, and that you will have no particular wish to push them hard.  However, it is likely that they will wish to give you some help if - as is the case - you maintain your position of support for Britain's EU membership.  You will then be able to return to Britain after the renegotiation claiming "game, set and match" (drawing on the precedent set after Maastricht).

• It may be that members of the Cabinet resign before the referendum which follows, in order to campaign for a No vote - joining many MPs and party members in so doing.  However, you will rightly be able to maintain that you have consistently supported Britain's EU membership, and we can be confident that you will be joined on the campaign trail by the leaders of Britain's other two main parties.

• As agreed, it is likely that Britain, without a strong business lobby for No, will vote to continue to maintain its EU membership: you will have seen that the polls are turning round already.  As also agreed, the depature from Cabinet of opponents of Britain's membership would leave you in a stronger position.  And as also agreed, the departure altogether of MPs and party members opposed to membership would not be without its benefits.

• After all, your mission since you first became party leader in 2005 has been to modernise the Conservative Party.  It is fair to say that there is a marked crossover between those MPs and party members who wish to see Britain leave the EU and those MPs and party members who have proved an obstacle to the modernisation project.  Their humbling would speed the emergence of the New Model Conservative Party of which we have long dreamed.

ends

Defection to UKIP in Telford & Wrekin

Another defection to UKIP ...

Press Release: TAWPA Councillor defects to UKIP

Great Dawley Parish Councillor, Mohammed “Richard” Choudhary, has switched his political affiliation from Telford & Wrekin Peoples’ Association (TAWPA) to the UK Independence Party (UKIP). Cllr Choudhary is UKIP’s fourth councillor in Telford & Wrekin.

Cllr Choudhary attended a UKIP meeting in Wellington last week and joined the party the same night. On joining he said “I have made a lot of friends in TAWPA but I believe that UKIP is the future both nationally and here in Telford & Wrekin where it is the only party to publish a local manifesto”.

Cllr Choudhary hopes to be joined on Great Dawley Parish Council by 25 year old Ryan Laing who has been selected to contest the parish and borough by-elections in Dawley on 14th February. Ryan is a former member of the Scottish Youth Parliament, former member of the UK Youth Parliament, former Chairman of South Lanarkshire Youth Council and is currently a Trustee for two local charities, a voluntary street pastor and works as a houseparent in a special educational needs school in Shrewsbury.

The local Labour lot aren't very happy ...

Press TV attack UKIP for defending democracy

UKIP is getting some stick - mainly in the left wing press - for refusing to support an attempt by the EU Commission to ban the nationalist group that the BNP and French National Front belong to from receiving EU funding.

Who says news is being dumbed down?

The far left Iranian state TV channel, Press TV, describes UKIP as "far right" and says that the party "backs Euro extremism".  They also say that Godfrey Bloom was expelled from the EU Parliament for "directing a Nazi slogan against a German colleague".

Godfrey was indeed removed from the EU Parliament for quoting Hitler's "ein volk, ein reich, ein führer" at German MEP, Martin Schultz.  But this was a reference to Schultz's fascist behaviour (Schultz has previously called Emperor Barosso a fascist in the EU Parliament and nobody batted an eyelid) rather than him behaving like a Nazi.

UKIP is far from far right and certainly doesn't back any form of extremism.  It's worth remembering the words of First they came for the Jews by Pastor Niemoller, made all the more pertinent with today being Holocaust Memorial Day.

First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Once they've finished with the nationalists, they'll move on to the eurosceptics and then who?

No matter how odious the BNP may be, they were democratically elected in a free and (mostly) fair election.  This isn't about protecting the BNP, it's about protecting democracy.

Statement on gay marriage

Following recent events where UKIP's stand on gay marriage has been misrepresented in the press and on social media, the party has clarified its position once again:

Nothing about this Bill has alleviated our concerns over whether individuals or religious institutions will be adequately protected from legal contests against their stance on same sex marriage.

Such legal contests could end up in the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. With only one example of case history directly relating to same sex marriage, it is impossible to predict how future judgments would go.

The real issue here is that final judgements would be made by judges in Strasbourg and could not be overturned by the UK. The matter would be entirely out of British hands.

A lot of the debate on same sex marriage actually centres on the definition and propriety of the term “marriage” and how various individuals and institutions take ownership of and interpret that term. For the Church of England the word defines a contract between a man and woman. For many in society and across the world, the application is far broader. As a party we are not in any way opposed to civil partnerships. Indeed we are the only party to believe that transferable married tax allowance should be made available to couples in civil partnerships and that they should be on an equal footing with traditional marriages.

We are more than happy for people who wish to define themselves within society as “married” to do so, however we wholly disagree with the intrusion of the Government on a religious institution’s definition of the term marriage, whatever that religion may be.

Where the Bill purports to protect the individuals and religious institutions, it is our fear that via legal interference, quite the reverse is true.

The issue is not the clean-cut black and white debate that is being portrayed in the media. It raises a variety of challenging questions ranging from the definitions of consummation of marriage to adultery, which will lead to a Gordian knot of legal implications and difficulties likely to wind up in a court in Strasbourg to which British law is fully subservient and over which Britain bears no control.

It is expressly for these reasons that we believe the Bill is rather cynically being used as a popularity boost and a distraction from other issues, when in fact there is far more at stake than meets the eye.

UKIP's opposition to the British government's proposed new law on gay marriage isn't because the party is opposed to gay marriage, it is because the party wants to protect religious freedoms and not just for Christians but for all religions.

Lewes Cllr Donna Edmunds defects to UKIP

Cllr Donna Edmunds has defected from the Conservatives to UKIP.

Cllr Edmunds said that aside from their stance on the EU, she left because the Tories have "abandoned their conservative values and no longer speak for the aspirational".

Cllr Edmunds is now the UKIP councillor for Barcombe & Hamsey ward of Lewes District Council.

Nice speech Dave, let's celebrate with a defection

Kent County Councillor, Adrian Crowther, has defected to UKIP "not just because of our stance on the European Union, but more importantly on our stance on a number of issues, both local and national" said UKIP leader, Nigel Farage.

Meanwhile, the phones have been ringing off the hook today at Lexdrum House with disgusted and disillusioned Tories responding to Cowardly Cameron's pathetic speech by joining UKIP.  One lady is reported to have been furious at his decision to only hold a referendum after the next election, describing it as "blackmail".

Expect a raft of defections in the coming days.

This councillor's not for turning

Conservative Home's Harry Phibbs had been emailing UKIP Councillors asking them to join the Conservative Party after Cameron's pathetic EU speech today.

Dear UKIP councillor,

As some of you know I edit the Local Government section of Conservative Home and would be interested in your reaction to David Cameron's speech this morning.

In particular if you feel that the offer of an in/out referendum on EU membership from the Conservatives means you feel Conservative victory at the General Election would be preferable to Labour victory and if so if you will consider joining the Conservatives. Or if not what would be required to persuade you to join.

I would like to write a blog with comments so please let me know if they are on the record or not for attribution.

Strangely, I didn't get this email despite being a UKIP councillor and even being on Conservative Home's mailing list.  Perhaps their generous benefactor, Lord Ashcroft, has a target list of UKIP councillors as well as constituencies?

In case you're wondering Harry, I'd rather poke my eyes out with a spoon that join the Conservatives.  I've never voted Tory in my life and I certainly don't intend to start just because David Cameron has made another empty promise of an EU referendum after the next election that he won't win on the ridiculous premise that he would somehow renegotiate our relationship with the EU when the only legal basis for doing so is invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty which gives notice that we intend to leave.  David Cameron has made it very clear yet again - as he did before the Conservative Party membership voted for him as leader - that he is committed to the UK's continued membership of the EU and clearly isn't going to entertain the idea of invoking Article 50.  There is very little difference between Labour and the Conservatives and whichever of those two authoritarian, economically illiterate, europhile parties manages to secure a majority in 2015 really doesn't matter because without UKIP MPs in Parliament this country isn't going to get back on its feet.

Sorry, Mr. Cameron, But UKIP Has Many Foxes

Well, if the headlines are to believed this morning, then David Cameron is about to pledge an In/Out Referendum on EU Membership after the next election.

It's quite easy to see his strategy here. Firstly, he hopes that he will "shoot UKIP's fox" by offering the referendum, allowing ex-Tory voters to return to the fold in time for the next election. Assuming the Conservatives form the next government, then despite the almost certainly choreographed huffing and puffing  from senior EU sources stating that no renegotiation is possible, clearly some cosmetic changes will be afforded. That will allow Cameron to claim a great victory, even though it is nothing of the kind.  He and other EUphiles will then campaign to stay in the EU in the subsequent referendum, banking cynically on the publics fear of change.

On the subject of UKIP's support, his major difficulty is that UKIP these days has many foxes. Behind the curve as usual, Cameron and his fellow cronies don't realise that UKIP has come to represent mainstream thinking on a whole range of issues for people repelled by what they see as an arrogant and remote MetroLib Establishment. Moreover, Europe lags significantly behind immigration as a priority issue for UKIP inclined voters.

It is for these reasons that Cameron's strategy regarding UKIP voters is likely to backfire spectacularly. Yes, we may take a short-term hit in the polls, probably a significant one,  and the "UKIP surge" will be triumphantly written off by a relieved establishment that will go back to it's complacent, arrogant ways. But in the medium term it is likely to bolster the respect for the party seen to have taken on an invincible elite and won though sheer tenacity and determination.

And if it can be done once, then it can be done again and again on issue after issue. Given the deep public unease over immigration and the coming influx of Romanians and Bulgarians in 2014 many will feel that voting UKIP may finally bring the establishment to heel over that issue as it has done on the EU question.

In conclusion, when you look at the bigger picture, UKIP's major triumph is not to force a referendum on the European question, significant though that is,  but to give a cowed and apathetic British electorate hope that their voices will, in the end, be heard.

No doubt it will continue to be very tough, and at times demoralising. But keep on fighting, and in the end the field will be ours.

EU wants power to sack journalists

The EU wants to force the creation of a media regulator in the UK with statutory powers to fine journalists and remove their accreditation.

A panel of EU fascists has criticised the British government for not creating a media regulator and recommended that one be forced upon us, answerable to the EU Commission to "ensure [it] complies with European values".

The timing of this latest assault on democracy and freedom by the EU couldn't be better.  The media will be reporting on Cameron's in/in sham referendum speech tomorrow and they're likely to be less than positive about the EU and his unswerving commitment to our membership when they're directly attacking the media.

EU wants to ban funding for nationalists

The EU Parliament is trying to stop funding for the Alliance of European National Movements group because they don't like their politics.

The group contains the BNP, French National Front and Hungarian Jobbik Party amongst others.  They are due to share €300k of funding in a couple of weeks but some MEPs are trying to stop that funding by rushing through a change to the rules that says only groups that respect EU values can get EU money.

The proposed rule change defines EU values as "respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities".  The people of Greece, Ireland and Italy might have something to say about the EU's respect for dignity, freedom and democracy seeing as how they've had austerity, billions of pounds of debt and in the case of Greece and Italy, an EU-sponsored coup d'état followed by the imposition of unelected leaders forced on them by the EU.

But irrespective of what europhile traitor MEPs like to think the values of the EU are, this proposed rule change would set a very dangerous precedent.  As odious as the BNP and their ilk are, they are democratically elected representatives and to refuse to give them funding they are entitled to because their politics are offensive to most MEPs (if that transpires to be the case) is undemocratic.  And once they've banned the nationalists from getting EU funding, how long until they turn to the eurosceptics that don't promote the EU value missing from the above list of destruction of the nation state?  And then the conservatives who, in theory, should oppose the isolationism and protectionism of the EU?

Unsurprisingly this attempt to ride roughshod over democracy has been supported by all of Labour's 13 MEPs but it still needs a further 70 MEPs to support it before the rule change can be made.  Let's hope that this dangerous, undemocratic rule change doesn't get forced through.

First they came for the BNP and I did not speak out because I was not BNP. Then they came for the eurosceptics and I did not speak out because I was not a eurosceptic. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.

UKIP Is Here To Stay

After the Marr show last weekend, ConHome's Tim Montgomerie tweeted, bizarrely, that if an In/Out Referendum on the EU was granted, then UKIP should disband and put all their resources into campaigning for an out vote. He seemed dispirited that this was "now not going to happen."

No, it's not.

The persistent delusions concerning UKIP held by the Metropolitan classes are truly remarkable: namely that we are simply a single issue pressure group / protest vote / angry white men / reactionary Tories / turbo-Thatcherites / Thatcherite tribute band / < insert your prejudice here >.

Plainly there are - or more correctly were - elements of truth  to some of these accusations, but less and less so with every passing today. Obviously UKIP did start life as a single issue party, and it's adherence to classical Liberal economics and strands of Libertarian thought could, albeit somewhat simplistically, be defined as turbo-Thatcherite.

If that was all there was to us,  then both labels would confine UKIP to permanent fringe party status. But these days it is quite clear that what UKIP represents more than anything else is the return of honesty and conviction in British politics and a rejection of the deceits and vanities of the MetroLib political and media classes.

More and more people now perceive that we live in effectively a neo-Medieval society. Power is concentrated in the hands of a small and highly concentrated elite whose internationalist outlook and values have far more in common with their counterparts in other lands than the great mass of people within their own realm. This elite view the common people in a not disimilar way from the way the old Medieval elites did - namely as an uneducated mob whose prejudices must be occasionally pandered to but otherwise be locked out of power and influence. Hitherto, the old class-based Tory-Labour duopoly has proved extremely useful to the elite in this regard, locking in unthinking tribal voting patterns for generation after generation. True, the heavy religious component of Medieval life seems at first glance to be absent, but the Roman Catholic Church has been replaced by the new internationalist organisations whose goals have been raised to a quasi -religious status - for instance the European Court of Human Right and, of course, the European Union.

Before the financial crash, it seemed that this elite hegemony was set fair to go on forever. However, the current depression has concentrated all our minds and show the Emperor really has no clothes. People increasingly see through the trickery and illusion, and as such UKIP's appeal is broadening substantially. Every television performance by a passionate UKIP representative shines a bright light onto the blandness, mendacity and cowardice of the political class parties, slowly but surely crystallising opposition to them. It is often argued that UKIP is a threat merely to the Tories, risking permanently splitting the right-wing vote in a way that the Labour - Liberal split so damaged the Left in the 20th Century. However, long term UKIP are arguably as great a threat to the Labour party. Bereft of class baggage, the party can appeal to the social conservatism and level-headedness of many Northern working class voters who would never consider voting Tory in a million years.

We all tend to ignore and discount trends we find uncomfortable, and the dismissal of UKIP's rise by the Political Class is part of that phenomenon. Although plainly they are beginning to see us as some form of threat, the magnitude of that threat is still not properly perceived.

The truth is that UKIP have a moral mission well beyond it's founding issue of the European Union. In fact, Britain's original entry into what has become the European Union could be regarded as a symptom of a disease, rather than the disease itself. Namely that even 40 years substantial elements within the old political elites had nothing but contempt for the country and the people they governed, and were ready to betray them when they calculated it was to their own advantage. It is UKIP's task to advance the cause of liberty not merely by reversing many of the acts of treachery over the past decades, but by leveraging the technological possibilities of the digital age to give people powers of self-government that they have never truly had.

Power to the People!

How you can help to get cabinet devolution minutes released

Cross-posted from Wonko's World

The SNP have asked the British government for the minutes of the 1997 cabinet meeting on devolution in which it was decided that the Scots and Welsh would be allowed self government whilst England would not.

This important document has been requested a number of times under the Freedom of Information Act and blocked every time.  The Information Commissioner has ruled that release of the minutes is in the public interest and ordered their release but they were blocked by the Attorney General, Dominic Grieve.

What are these traitors so desperate to hide?

Vetoing FOI requests requires the unanimous agreement of the cabinet.  When Jack Straw and Dominic Grieve vetoed their release in 2009 and 2012, these people conspired to keep the minutes secret:

Jack Straw	Dominic Grieve
The Rt Hon Gordon Brown MP	The Rt Hon. David Cameron MP
The Rt Hon Harriet Harman QC MP	The Rt Hon. Nick Clegg MP
The Rt Hon The Lord Mandelson PC	The Rt Hon. William Hague MP
The Rt Hon Alistair Darling MP	The Rt Hon. George Osborne MP
The Rt Hon David Miliband MP	The Rt Hon. Kenneth Clarke QC MP
The Rt Hon Jack Straw MP	The Rt Hon. Theresa May MP
The Rt Hon Alan Johnson MP	The Rt Hon. Dr Liam Fox MP
The Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP	The Rt Hon. Philip Hammond MP
The Rt Hon Douglas Alexander MP	The Rt Hon. Dr Vince Cable MP
The Rt Hon John Denham MP	The Rt Hon. Iain Duncan Smith MP
The Rt Hon Ed Balls MP	The Rt Hon. Chris Huhne MP
The Rt Hon Ed Miliband MP	The Rt Hon. Edward Davey MP
The Rt Hon Andy Burnham MP	The Rt Hon. Andrew Lansley CBE MP
The Rt Hon Shaun Woodward MP	The Rt Hon. Michael Gove MP
The Rt Hon The Baroness Royall of Blaisdon PC	The Rt Hon. Eric Pickles MP
The Rt Hon Tessa Jowell MP	The Rt Hon. Philip Hammond MP
The Rt Hon Jim Murphy MP	The Rt Hon. Justine Greening MP
The Rt Hon Yvette Cooper MP	The Rt Hon. Caroline Spelman MP
The Rt Hon Liam Byrne MP	The Rt Hon. Andrew Mitchell MP
The Rt Hon Peter Hain MP	The Rt Hon. Owen Paterson MP
The Rt Hon Bob Ainsworth MP	The Rt Hon. Danny Alexander MP
The Rt Hon The Lord Adonis MP	The Rt Hon. Michael Moore MP
The Rt Hon Ben Bradshaw MP	The Rt Hon. Cheryl Gillan MP
The Rt Hon Nick Brown MP	The Rt Hon. Jeremy Hunt MP
The Rt Hon The Lord Malloch-Brown KCMG PC	The Rt Hon. David Laws MP
The Rt Hon John Healey MP	The Rt Hon. Danny Alexander MP
The Rt Hon Pat McFadden MP	The Rt Hon. The Lord Strathclyde PC
The Rt Hon The Lord Drayson PC	The Rt Hon. The Baroness Warsi PC
The Rt Hon Jim Knight MP	The Rt Hon. Francis Maude MP
The Rt Hon The Baroness Scotland of Asthal PC QC	The Rt Hon. Oliver Letwin MP
The Rt Hon Dawn Primarolo MP	The Rt Hon. David Willetts MP
The Rt Hon Rosie Winterton MP	The Rt Hon. Sir George Young Bt MP
The Rt Hon Sadiq Khan MP	The Rt Hon. Patrick McLoughlin MP
	The Rt Hon. Dominic Grieve QC MP

The minutes are really of more interest to the English than the Scots as they got what they wanted and we got shafted so we shouldn't be leaving it to the Scots to get these minutes into the public domain.  If every English person interested in seeing what decisions were made at the cabinet meeting that have resulted in over 15 years of institutional discrimination against the English made a Freedom of Information request for the minute, it would be extremely damaging to the British government if they tried to block their release to hundreds or thousands of people.

If you want to help force the release of these minutes, you need to send an FOI request for them to foi.team@cabinet-office.gsi.gov.uk.  My request is as follows:

Under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, I am requesting a copy of the minutes of the 1997 Cabinet meetings on devolution. I am also requesting a copy of the Terms of Reference for the cabinet committee headed by Lord Irvine that the minutes relate to and any legal or departmental advice provided to the cabinet in relation to these meetings.

Update:
Kev has started an e-Petition on the British government's website.

See also:

• The Illusive Man
• English Patriot
• English Standard
• The Blog of Kev
• England Exists

Farage tells Cowardly Cameron not to book himself any studio time

Responding to Cowardly Cameron's pronouncement that the leader of the UK's third (and fastest growing) party shouldn't be allowed to take part in any televised leaders' debates before the next election but the leader of the fourth party should, Nigel Farage had this to say:

If he wants to restrict it to those parties who are likely to form the next government, he’d better not be booking studio time himself.

Quite.  Meanwhile, someone has started a petition on the HM Government e-petitions site for UKIP to be included in any televised debate and it's trending already.

Extracts from Cowardly Cameron's cancelled EU speech

Conservative Home has extracts from Cowardly Cameron's cancelled EU speech.  They can be summed up in one word: weak.

Every time someone votes for UKIP a puppy dies

I want Britain to stay in Europe… “I come here as British Prime Minister with a positive vision for the future of the European Union. A future in which Britain wants, and should want, to play a committed and active part.”

Britain doesn't want to play a part in the European Union.  Most people want to leave.

…but Europe must change. “I want to speak to you today with urgency and frankness about the European Union and how it must change – both to deliver prosperity and to retain the support of its peoples.”

It's the EU, not Europe.  The EU won't change for the better, it will continue to diverge at an alarming rate from the national interests of all member states (apart from Germany of course) and especially ours.

Yes, it really must change. “More of the same will not secure a long-term future for the eurozone. More of the same will not see the European Union keeping pace with the new powerhouse economies. More of the same will not bring the European Union any closer to its citizens. More of the same will just produce more of the same – less competitiveness, less growth, fewer jobs. And that will make our countries weaker, not stronger.”

The EU is an anti-competitive, protectionist, despotic state.  It will never compete with emerging economies because it is insular and above all a political project, not a trade one.

The three challenges facing Europe. “There are always voices saying, ‘Don’t ask the difficult questions’. But it’s essential for Europe – and for Britain – that we do because there are three major challenges confronting us today. … First, the problems in the eurozone are driving fundamental change in Europe. Second, there is a crisis of European competitiveness, as other nations across the world soar ahead. And third, there is a gap between the EU and its citizens which has grown dramatically in recent years and which represents a lack of democratic accountability and consent that is – yes – felt particularly acutely in Britain.”

He means the EU, not Europe.  The collapse of the €uro is driving change the wrong way - towards full fiscal and political union which is a disaster for democracy.

Britain could leave if these challenges aren’t overcome. “If we don't address these challenges, the danger is that Europe will fail and the British people will drift towards the exit,”

Europe can't fail, it's a huge landmass.  The EU will fail though and if we don't get out in time we will get dragged down with it.

Although, again, I don’t want that. “I want the European Union to be a success and I want a relationship between Britain and the EU that keeps us in it.”

Yes Dave, we know you're a committed europhile and will do whatever it takes to make sure we stay in.

And more on the democratic challenge. “There is a growing frustration that the EU is seen as something that is done to people rather than acting on their behalf, and this is being intensified by the very solutions required to resolve the economic problems … People are increasingly frustrated that decisions taken further and further away from them mean their living standards are slashed through enforced austerity or their taxes are used to bail out governments on the other side of the continent.”

It's all part of the plan Dave, all of it.  As expected, Cameron has committed himself to our continued membership of the EU and once again thrown away the only bargaining chip we have.  Conspicuous in its absence from this europhile drivel are details of his pinky promise in/in referendum.  Eurosceptic Tories will be bitterly disappointed at what was evidently going to be a fawning, pro-EU speech.  Confirming the worst kept secret - that the EU referendum won't have an "out" option or will at least contain two "in" options to dilute the "out" vote - would tip huge numbers of them over the edge.

Cameron blocks Romanian & Bulgarian immigration figures

David Cameron and Eric Pickles are conspiring to prevent the release of official predictions of how many Romanians and Bulgarians are likely to move here when immigration controls are relaxed for the two EU member states next year.

Our glorious leader with his Nazi-loving
friend in the EU Parliament

Unofficial estimates put the figure at around 425,000 which would drive up unemployment, decimate already inadequate housing stocks and put an intolerable strain on public services.

Cameron said that they don't want to release the predictions early because they don't have enough confidence in them and then went on to cite the influx of Polish immigrants in 2004 when the British government predicted 14,000 would move here and nearly half a million came instead.  If he's suggesting that the 425,000 number that's being thrown around might be a bit on the low side then we need to know right now because there are 21m people living in Romania and Bulgaria and a fifth of them are living below the poverty line.

We need to know right now because to deliberately flood the country with that many eastern European immigrants knowing that there is a very real possibility that it would destroy the economy, send unemployment out of control, leave tens of thousands of people homeless or living in overcrowded houses and increase racial/ethic/cultural tensions then one or two people might consider that to be an act of treason.