Independent countries freely choosing to confederate on common issues yes, but an all subsuming superstate where an elite dictate without an electoral mandate.

This is indeed the issue at the present time in Scotland. The Scots are unhappy about electoral domination from Westminster and it matters not a jot that the Prime Minister and half his entourage come from Scotland.

Most especially, the Conservative party steadfastly refused to consider any form of devolution in Scotland and the Labour Party introduced debvolution to arrest the march towards the SNP.

Both approaches at enforcing a UK supersate have failed. The Scots have rejected the Conservatives in Scotland and they will never in their present form regain any power – at least not for another generation, if ever.

Labour are similarly following the same path. The SNP are in government in the Scottish Parliament, they control many many councils, have 25% of the MEPs and are now poised to take the Glasgow East seat from Labour in a constituency that has been labour held for 72 years!

So, what does all of this say. Well simply I think John Redwood is right on Europe. You cannot force Scotland, England or Ireland into a so called Union that the people don't want.

Ireland showed it in the 20's ( or in fact for a long time before that), Scotland is showing it now, and John Redwood is raising the issue for many of the Conservatives.

When Scotland goes independent, as it will, England will gain a very good neighbour. We have very much in common, we have blood ties and shared interests.

At that time we will have a 'Union' where the parties entered into it of their own will and choice.

No. I recall no such vote as we move inexorably to a European Superstae.

Of course Westminster acts in exactly the same way when it denies the people of Scotland a referendum on whether or not the Scots wish to secede from the Union and redefien the relationship on equal nation status.

The Iron Fist is alive and kicking, both here and in Europe, and the Conservative party is as guilty as the rest.

I am Polish, living in Warsaw, and my national Parliament has deprived us Poles of our voice in this matter (guess why). As they comment the situation – you can imagine how crushed the government's spokespeople are – "A single, small nation should not enforce their will over the will of all the United Europe", they explain fiercely. However, they DO wish a group of a few Brussels' politicians to enforce THEIR will over all the Europeans, without asking them for their opinion and agreement. Very democratic indeed.

(words left out)
The sour grapes line being peddled on BBC about 3 million (by implication) "ruining it" for 490 million conveniently ignores that fact that it is under 10,000 representatives in those countries that are steamrollering the citizens of 26 countries into this superstate with very few of us ever having been asked if that's where we want to go….

They stated that the Brussels elite were very angry because the Irish PM had “failed to deliver his country” to the EU.

What on Earth does that mean?

Does it mean the populations of the member states are seen by the leaders ot the EUSSR as mere commodoties that can be traded by the elite? Is the EUSSR a giant collective farm and the people are merely livestock on that farm?

How on Earth can a trading block agreement become a soviet style authoritarian centalised super state in such a relative short time period? Why have our own governments let this happen?