today

And here it is: "Under centuries old British Constitutional legislation our sovereign, as the title implies, can hold no allegiance to anyone except to the people of the UK – which is why, obviously, he or she is sovereign! In fact the sovereign is expressly forbidden in our Constitutional Statutes to subordinate himself or herself to any foreign power or person – as, indeed, are all subjects of the sovereign. For a subject of our sovereign to usurp our sovereignty by recognising the precedence of a foreign power or entity over our sovereign, by signing a treaty that recognises the precedence of a foreign power or entity over our sovereign, is to commit treason. In addition a British sovereign who owes allegiance to any power, by claiming to be a subject of that power for instance, will have committed treason against the British people and, in doing so, have abdicated as sovereign! You cannot have a sovereign who is a subject of anybody or anything, within our constitutional law! The constitutional minefield that the media is apparently desperate to avoid walking into can be summed up in a single question: How can Her Majesty claim to be “sovereign” when all the evidence suggests that her official status is that of a citizen of the legal foreign entity currently calling itself the European Union – which at some stage will morph into the United States of Europe? "

Also, William Hague says "When you examine the small print, it is clear his so-called safeguards have no legal guarantees at all."

IMO: Right now would be a bad time to have a referendum, and in the longer term it may not be needed. Brown seems to have so far behaved quite wisely, though not always scrupulously. We can hope he can deal with the Blair legacy and consolidate his own position, without acting like a Tory on the one hand or a weak trade Union stooge on the other [someone said:"or by going on a killing rampage like Toady did']. So far he has negotiated this position reasonably well. Things like the EU always bring an element of hardship and it is hoped that this will not increase. India is having its own problems with SAFTA which may be starting to work with Bangladesh (which admittedly is rather unwanted in SAFTA in the short term, but India is still India, even after partition and in the longer term all may work very well, with a free trade area).