Is it all a con? I'm begining to think so.

Two days have gone by and from where I’m sitting I still can’t see how the Prime Minister’s renegotiation addresses the problems with the UK-EU relationship.

Danish Parliament. The European Court has now issued 79 judgements that completely ignore promises made to Denmark.

The British public want to end the supremacy of EU law and the European Court and take back control over our borders, economy and democracy.  Before the general election, the Prime Minister promised ‘fundamental change’ in our relationship with the EU and ‘full-on Treaty change’ before the referendum.

But the deal is the political equivalent of ‘a very small cheque is in the post’.  Nothing in the renegotiation even comes close to fundamental, ‘full-on Treaty change’. Interestingly the renegotiation states right at the beginning that it is ‘in conformity with the Treaties’.  This reaffirms the supremacy of the EU Treaties over UK law.

The Government is now trying to con you by claiming that the renegotiation is legally binding.  It is not. Depositing it at the UN is a meaningless gesture intended to give the impression of legitimacy.  So don’t be fooled: the Government’s deal is not legally binding.  The only way to make a deal legally binding is to change the Treaties and have this change ratified by all EU members.  This has not happened.  It may never happen.  Nobody can guarantee it will happen.

We don’t even know who might be leading these countries in five years time - never mind what they might agree.  The President of the European Parliament has admitted that nothing is irreversible and that MEPs might reject the deal.  Sir Konrad Schiemann, a former English Court of Appeal and former European Court of Justice Judge, has effectively confirmed this by saying that legally-binding changes can ‘only be achieved by following the lengthy processes in each Member State for ratifying Treaties’.

The claim that ‘being deposited at the United Nations’ makes the renegotiation ‘legally binding’ is a fiction.  The UN accepts all sorts of documents being deposited - it says nothing about their legal status.  Further, even if the UN were to claim that the deal is binding in international law, the European Court has already made clear that it is not bound by international law.

So, is there history in the EU breaking its promises?  You bet!

The EU made similar promises to Denmark in 1992 when it promised to respect national citizenship laws.  Brussels told the Danish people that these changes would be ‘legally binding’.  They lied.  The European Court has now issued 79 judgements that completely ignore the promises made to Denmark.  Are they are now trying to play the same trick on us? The track record says, yes they are.

Don’t let them con you.