I have been hearing about what the polls say. This matters, as polls help drive the attitude of politcal parties. They are one of the main ways politicians in their party groupings try to stay in touch and to understand the public mood. I personally tend to rely more on the emails, letters, doorstep conversations, web comments and the rest that I receive. The polls can provide some useful additional information, if the right questions are asked and the quantitative work is done professionally.

The polls confirm that the economy is the overriding issue to most people. The rising cost of living and unemployment dominate as concerns. People have been very worried about the price of fuel and energy, fares and Council tax, all items that goverment has considerable influence over through the tax and regulatory systems.

Immigration is the next biggest concern. People are very critical of the open borders policy of the previous government. They accept that the Coalition government is seeking to do something about it, but they want more progress and more results more quickly from the changes. There is very substantial support for cutting the deficit as a necessary precondition for economic improvement, and very strong support for moves to limit the welfare bills in an attempt to end the “something for nothing culture” which people think grew up on the fringes of the welfare system under the previous government.

The EU does not poll as a top concern. Attitudes to the EU are heavily sceptical, with only around one fifth in favour of all the powers and policies of the current EU. It is not clear, however, that there is a majority for simple withdrawal. Many want a common market type relationship, falling short of complete exit.

The latest figures for GDP show the trend we have highlighted here of rising real public spending continues. The first quarter of 2012 compared with the same quarter a year before shows public spending up 3%, household expenditure down 0.9% and exports down 1%. Over the first quarter government consumption grew by 1.9% on the previous quarter, whilst household expenditure dropped by 0.1%.

I am pleased to report that I have a letter from Defra apologising for quoting millions as billions, and billions as millions, in their annual accounts. They say they will amend it.

The UK government should say something like this:

“In 1972 the Uk joined the EEC. This was known as the Common market in the UK. In 1975 the then Labour government gave the UK public a referendum on whether they should remain in the EEC. The whole scheme was clearly defined by the leading politicians in favour as simply a common market that would promote more free trade and allow there to be more jobs in export industries for the UK. The public was told there would be no loss of sovereignty. Rumours of a gradual move to political and monetary union were downplayed or denied. The public voted Yes to such a Common market.

There was no majority then, and no majority subsequently for the UK to join a political and monetary union. The UK refused to join the currency union, negotiating an opt out from membership at Maastricht. The UK successively negotiated opt outs or preserved a veto for the Social Chapter, the common borders, common defence and security, common taxation and criminal justice. The Conservative opposition voted against the Nice, Amsterdam and Lisbon Treaties on the grounds that they still gave away too much governing power. The Conservative majority in the present government believes the UK needs a different relationship, as it does not accept the large transfers of power that have occurred in recent years.

We now find the Euro area members wishing to move further and faster towards a political union. They seek a banking union and a fiscal union of sorts. The UK cannot possibly join member states in such a move. As so many of the arrangements and Treaty agreeemnts are once again being reviewed, the UK wishes to review its relationship with the emerging political union it cannot join.

We seek a relationship based on trade and friendship, where the Uk will join other member states in doing things together where it is mutually advantageous so to do. If our signature is required on any new Treaty, we will need amendments for us that give effect to this wish for a different relationship.

The UK has been a good European by not joining the Euro. UK membership might have badly damaged the single currency by now, given the size of UK banks and the need for frequent currency adjustments both ways against the Euro over the last decade. As far as we are concerned the EU is a voluntary association of democratic states. Just as some states now want more EU power over them, the UK now wants less. It is important to accommodate both sets of wishes, to have a happier and more successful EU.

              Prior to the election I set out items I thought were missing from the government’s balance sheet that ought to be there. I estimated the bank liabilities from banks with government shareholdings, PFIand  PPP liabilities which are another kind of borrowing, and unfunded  public sector pensions.  I said that an incoming Conservative government  should and probably would set out these items for us all to see.

             So it proved with the Coalition government. They have published figures showing much larger state liabilities. On this site I have been criticised for failing to include the figures for the basic state retirement pension. I do not see this as a liability in the way government borrowing or PFI is a liability. The scheme has always been pay as you go. In that sense it is just like the NHS or the education service. We pay taxes in collectively, and those in need of these services receive the benefits.

             However, I have no wish to disappoint people who do wish to have in mind an even larger figure for state liabilities. If we take the 10 million Old Age Pensioners today, and multiply that by the £140 a week pension promised for the time after the forthcoming reforms, we get an annual bill of £73 billion. If you multiply this by 20 you get the rough capital cost of such provision, or £1.5 trillion. You could make it more if you allowed for further increases in pensioner numbers given growing longevity. I hope that makes my critics feel better!

           The long running Euro crisis is set to run and run. This week’s summit of EU leaders is no more likely to fix it than all the previous ones, each billed as the crunch summit to save the Euro.

           This time on the agenda is the prospect of a Euro area Finance Minister and Treasury. The Germans are making the perfectly reasonable demand that if they are to back up the credit card for all the Euro nations, they want a say in how much they spend using it. Euro area countries are being  reassured that this is no great loss of power. After all, they are told, you the member states can decide how and where to make the cuts. All the EU authorities will wish to do is to set a limit on how much you can spend, and a total for you to raise in tax. The rest is your call!

           To do this properly will take Treaty changes. That is a long and arduous process, requiring ratification by all the states signing the new Treaty. It should trigger the odd referendum in a country like Ireland, and Parliamentary ratification everywhere involved. It does not sound like a quick fix.

          The last summit offered a banking union as the answer. We are told there will be more progress towards this. Here again, Germany will want some guarantees that she will be able to control or influence the policy of banks in faraway countries, if her credit card is to stand behind all the main banks of the Euro area.

            The truth is simple. Too many countries in the Euro area have spent too much, borrowed too much and have now run out of money. Too many banks in the Euro area have overexpanded their balance sheeets, are losing money on too many of their loans, and now need more capital.

              The rest of the EU would like the UK to put some money in to help deal with the cash shortfall. There is no reason why we should do any such thing. Nor should the IMF, but they are now fully engaged with a cause they should avoid. There are no signs that the Euro crisis is about to be solved. There is no evidence that the German people are ready to put the German credit card fully behind the troubled areas and banks of Euroland. If they are not willing to do so, why should we?

               The Euro remains an orphan currency in search of a country to look after it and support it. Creating a country called Euroland is taking too long for the good of its currency. The rich areas and countries are not willing to prop up all the poorer and weaker countries and institutions. There are now five countries needing special measures and special subsidised loans. It cannot go on like this. The UK government has a duty to ensure not a penny of UK taxpayers money is wasted on this scheme. It now looks as if the obligations of Euroland are also too big for the German state to taqke on, even if she wanted to.

           It’s good news that today the Chancellor has announced he will not press ahead with a 3p a litre fuel tax rise this August. He has listened to those of us who have warned about the impact of fuel prices on living standards and inflation.

           The May figures for public borrowing have risen from  £15.2 billion in May 2011 to £17.9 bn for May  2012.

            Spending is well up, rising by 7.9%. Income tax  and capital gains tax  revenue has fallen by 7.2% on the same month last year, underlining fears expressed on this site that the government has not set revenue maximising rates. The higher rates are yielding less revenue.

             The government says there might be one off items distorting these figures. However, the falling receipts from Income Tax is now a well established trend which should be worrying the Treasury. The spending figures confirm the arguments here that so far public spending  under this government has been rising in real terms overall, despite some specific cuts.

           I have been speaking in other constituencies in recent weeks, meeting Conservative members and voters. The overwhelming wish they have is to hold a referendum on the EU.

              I explain to them the ideas behind the government’s welfare reform proposals. I set out the government’s plans to cut the administrative overhead of government, and to tackle bureaucracy. I talk to them about the education and health reforms. I explain the latest proposals to try to get the banks lending to foster a private sector led recovery, which we need.  The questions will all be about Europe.

              If I spend more time talking about the EU, the questions will still be about Europe.Many Conservative members understand just how much the EU dictates to us, and how the EU is now a major part of the problem we face.

                Conservatives want the EU budget cut – not just the growth rate reduced, but big cuts in total spending. Many would simply like to be out altogether so we pay nothing.  They want an assurance that UK taxpayers will not have to pay a penny to bail out the Euro, as we wisely stayed out following a big battle mainly waged by Conservatives in the 1990s to keep us out. They want the government to spend less, and they think cutting the amount we spend on the EU is the best place to start.

                Conservatives want much less expensive regulation of our businesses. They understand that some steps have been taken on domestic regulation by the current government, but see also that the avalanche of new EU regulation overwhelms UK attempts to cut the overall burden.

             Conservatives want less interference in the way we handle our refuse, undertake our diplomacy, fish in our seas, run our criminal justice and work out  our environmental policy. The EU way for these things is rarely popular.

              Conservatives recognise that we were right about the Euro. They see that if the Euro area presses on with a political union to try to buttress their errant currency, the UK cannot possibly be part of it. They recognise the reality. This means we need a new relationship with the EU. They want their leaders to say so.

             Conservatives say that if we can have a referendum on the Alternative Vote, referenda on elected mayors, maybe a referendum on Lords reform, and if Scotland can have a vote on staying in the UK, why can’t the rest of us have the one referendum we want, a referendum on our relationship with the EU? Members in England want a better deal for England. They want the Conservative majority in England in the Commons to be allowed to make the calls for England in our increasingly devolved UK.

           I am delighted the Prime Minister wishes to define Conservative views and policies for the next election. He should understand that in the party there is just one overwhelming preoccupation amongst members, like it or not. They know the EU is going wrong for us, and they want a new sense of direction, a way out of the troubles the Euro and the EU are bringing us.