Confusion on Conservative Lisbon Treaty Policy

The following is from an item in The Times yesterday, linked here: Mr Hague told MPs: “If we don’t succeed in forcing a referendum in this House and if we fail to win in another place [the House of Lords], and if all EU member states implement the treaty and if an election is held later in this Parliament, which is a lot of ifs, then we would be in a situation where we had a new treaty in force that lacked democratic legitimacy in this country and in our view gave the EU too much power over our national policies.

“This would not be acceptable to a Conservative government and we would not let matters rest there.” When asked if that meant a postratification referendum, he replied: “It means what it says it means, exactly what I said earlier.”

Mr Clarke(Ken) then intervened, telling Mr Hague: “It seems to me that the alternatives are repudiation of a treaty which this country has ratified, an attempt to renegotiate it or reopen it or a parliamentary process of some kind, or a referendum.”

In my view this is an attempt to not only confuse, but also to deceive, as the restriction of 'in this parliament' restricts the commitment to a period when full ratiificatiom by all nations has not been accomplished. Cameron does seem to be prepared to accept permanent loss of our democracy if he is elected PM after the Treaty has been ratified and Britain will therefore only ever be able to withdraw under the unacceptable terms of Article 35 of said Treaty. In other words what little national wealth and assets might remain after our decades of membership will also be lost with who knows what obligations of longer term indebtedness.

Cameron's Conservatives are once again on the old devious pro-EU route.