The Ultimate Betrayal ?

Has Blair found a way to achieve his greatest ambition, to become President of Europe which does not involve taking Britain into the European Single Currency ?

It has been rumoured that he will not have to browbeat the reluctant people of Britain into accepting the Euro because he has stitched up a deal with the European power brokers to do something far more important; import the European Constitution into British law. After that the Euro is very small beer.

Tony's acolytes have always known that the confines of a small monarchy have never been enough for a man of Tony's talents. To play constitutional second fiddle to a small-c conservative, suburban monarch has rankled "The Dear Tony's" sense of self-importance. The strong feeling he has that the Peoples' loyalty lies not with him as the successful leader of New Labour has been exacerbated by the last twelve months.

The death of Elizabeth the Queen Mother, resulted in Downing Street getting into an untimely spat with the old establishment in the guise of Black Rod. Downing Street felt that at this time of National mourning it would be appropriate that the people should be represented by Blair. Black Rod, an obscure functionary in the House of Lords refused, and also refused to be cowed by the subsequent bullying. The Government felt that the passing of the 100 year former King's consort should be marked by a day's mourning. Another misjudgement, after 5 days over 200,000 had filed passed the coffin. This was followed by the success of the Queen's Golden Jubilee. "The Dear Tony" had spent the previous few years downplaying the event, the Brussels Embassy failed to organise a single event, merely "re-hatting" the annual birthday diplomatic cocktail party, but were overwhelmed, nevertheless, by the events and the National celebrations that took place.

It has become a truism that Tony Blair has Presidential, if not messianic, ambitions. For years the gossip in Brussels and Whitehall has been directed at this undisguised desire to shake of the bounds of an archaic country, with a monarch as the head of state.

No, that would never be enough.

It has long been said that Continental European leaders had dangled the prospect of the Presidency of a reformed EU in front of Blair. A Presidency that would not be the current 6 month revolving bauble, but a fully-fledged 5-year fixed term. The price, it had always been said by political commentators, was the entry of Britain into the Euro-zone, thus infusing the sclerotic economies of Europe with Britain's more dynamic one - and helping the continent out at a time when the bills for enlargement were just about to get a lot bigger. Observers of Britain's politics understood that the Tories were not going to be able to stop him in the House of Commons, but equally that the British people were far from convinced of the wisdom of such a move. In fact, over the past few years the opinion polls in Britain on the subject have been moving towards currency sceptism. Even last month the Captains of Industry annual survey published in January (a group of permanent supporters of Euro entry) carried out their regular annual survey on Euro attitudes amongst the big employers and found for the first time a majority no longer supported the option. 50 per cent did not "support the principle of British participation", against 42 per cent who did.

So what could Blair do to keep his ambitions on line?

It seems apparent that the present UK Government's love affair with the Euro has cooled. No longer do we have ministers appearing up and down the country trumpeting its self-evident benefits. Gordon Brown has been allowed to pour cold water on hot-headed advocates, which in turn has led to British press speculation on a cooling between the two men.

But what has been happening behind the scenes?

In the European Parliament, every month for the past year the Convention on a European Constitution has been meeting in the European Parliament in Brussels. Under the chairmanship of Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, it is gathering to a head with a plethora of draft Treaties being produced by the Commission, the Convention itself and a number of National Governments and other interested parties. Most recently and very prominently a proposal has gained ground that will create two Presidents of Europe; one, the President of the European Council, was described by Alain Lammasoure, a senior French member of the Convention, as "Chairman"; while the other, the President of the Commission as "the Chief Executive". It is to the Chairmanship role that Blair aspires. A role that would encompass the current jobs of the 25 foreign ministers, the Commissioner for External Relations, the High Representative for Foreign Affairs, the seat on the UN Security Council amongst others. Quite the sort of role the newly crowned leader of "new Europe" would see as fitting his achievements.

And this is the job that has been promised, according to an overheard statement by Giscard in the European Parliament at the end of the January session of the Convention. What Blair has to do, and do quietly is to ensure that the British Parliament passes the ratification of the Final Treaty of the European Constitution. The enormous importance of this is simple. The Treaty will set the powers of the EU in stone. It will define not the extremities in Brussels power, but more the limits left to national parliaments. If he can deliver Britain on a plate the job is his.

A revealing exchange in the House of Commons in December shows us how this is to be done. Peter Hain, ex-Minister for Europe and still the British Government's representative on the Convention answered a question on the whether the Constitution would be ratified by a popular vote or referendum;

"Treaty change is a matter for member states to decide by unanimity in accordance with their own constitutional requirements. In the United Kingdom this involves a ratification procedure requiring legislation. It is right that Parliament should decide on the results the Government achieves at inter-governmental conferences."

What this means in layman's terms is that the Government will be able to force the legislation though Westminster with recourse to its huge majority and the use of guillotine motions, so called by their ability to cut off debate. "The Dear Tony" is sure to get his prize.

This approach is in marked difference to many of the other EU member states. Denmark and Ireland have a constitutional requirement to offer a referendum. During November the Dutch Parliament voted to grant a referendum, the French Foreign Minister, Dominique de Villepin backed a referendum. Gianfranco Fini, the Italian Foreign Minister has also called for a referendum and in Germany there is pressure to change their constitution to allow for a referendum on the issue.

In Britain there are no such plans, for the simple reason that Mr Blair has no intention of allowing the people of Britain to vote on this issue which his opposition critics say would get in the way of the crowning pinnacle of his career.

IN SUMMARY; There could be an unlawful conspiracy (in Breach of the 1689 Bill of Rights) to cause this United Kingdom to cease to be an independent country - Independent Country being defined as a nation state that has a foreign policy decided by its own government and not by an Imperial Power - to bring this about however Blair has to persuade the Queen to give the Royal Assent.

If it prosper, none dare call it TREASON.