Nosemonkey's EUtopia

In search of a European identity

Oh, the irony, etc.

That dear Mr Blair (today’s his final full day in office, don’tchaknow?) has outright rejected a referendum on the new EU treaty is no surprise.

What is rather entertaining is the sheer gall of the man, arguing that a referendum campaign “would suck in the whole political energy of the country for months”.

This, of course, from the man who took two and a half years to finally announce the date for his resignation (tomorrow! Huzzah!) after the initial hints, prompting a solid 31 months of constant media speculation and petty distractions from the business of government, as both government figures and the opposition have jostled to gain the most from his departure.

Do you think he says that sort of stuff on purpose, or is he genuinely too dense to see the double-standards?

Meanwhile Blair seems to be about to be given a new job sorting out the mess in the Middle East, much like a less likeable British Jimmy Carter. That should keep him nicely out of the way (though not – what a shame – necessarily out of harm’s way) for a few years. As long as he doesn’t get his grubby, incompetent mitts on the proposed EU presidency, I honestly couldn’t care less.

Gordon Brown, meanwhile, must really love Tony right now – this new EU treaty business looks to be the nastiest problem Blair could possibly have left him with. Unless, of course, we manage to invade Iran or North Korea in the next 24 hours…


  1. You’ve been reading the Torygraph too much. Read Peter Riddell in the Times – – a much more nuanced analysis of the likely political fallout from the whole shebang.

  2. And I’ll repeat the point I made on the Today Programme on Friday morning (yes, me, on the Today Programme…), which was that the Labour Government’s strategic objective was to avoid a Treaty which looked too different from those on which the previous Tory Government refused to concede a referendum in 1992 in particular. And Blair succeeded.

  3. Nosemonkey, I just read your previous post on this issue. And the asinine comments of Bondwoman.

    You’re a bunch of fucking idiots. It’s a Constitution, they promised a referendum, so they must give us a vote. End of.

    It’s not rocket science. Either you believe in democracy or you don’t. Evidently you don’t. The only reason you don’t want a referendum is because you think you will lose.

    Moreover, you will soon look like wankers as well as idiots, because the chances are growing that there will be a referendum, whatever. The pressure will be too much. Check Simon Jenkins today in the Guardian – even the soft-left liberals admit that, morally, there has to be a vote.

    So in the end you will have been on the losing side of an argument where you took a morally odious position. Congrats, guys.

  4. Erm… Yes… Well done, Rob. A devastating argument.

    If you read what I’ve actually written, rather than relied on your preconceptions to interpret it for you, you’ll notice that I haven’t said that I don’t want a referendum at any point. In fact, in this post from a few days ago, I explicitly stated my support for one.

    If you read what Bondwoman wrote, you’ll also notice that at no point does she say a referendum should not take place.

    If you’ve read any of the posts I wrote about the old constitution, you’d also see that I have long maintained that I’d most likely vote “no” in a referendum, simply because the text was so half-heartedly awful.

    All I’ve been suggesting is that there is no requirement for a referendum under the British constitution – which there isn’t, as plebiscites undermine the fundamental concept of representative democracy and the sovereignty of parliament – so the case that this treaty is so similar to the old EU constitution that the prior commitment to a referendum should still stand needs to be made rather more strongly than through mere assertion.

    In other words, your hysterical response is precisely what I am suggesting that the anti-EU, pro-referendum crowd should avoid at all costs – it merely makes you look like you can’t take a calm, rational look at the thing, and makes you far harder to take seriously.

    (Oh, and by the by, the only good thing I can see in the old constitution or this new treaty is that it introduces more democracy and accountability to the EU – by opposing the constitution/treaty, you’re the one who’s opposing democracy… So ner.)

    No doubt I’ll now be accused of being patronising… Still, better than being a boor…

  5. Pingback: Nosemonkey / Europhobia » On passionate Eurosceptics