Millionaire Takes PM To Court Over Treaty

We are right behind you Stuart Wheeler, good luck!

A millionaire businessman is taking the Government to court today over its refusal to hold a referendum on the EU Treaty.

Stuart Wheeler claims he had "a legitimate expectation" that Gordon Brown would hold a public vote.

The Prime Minister has refused saying that the Lisbon Treaty, introduced after the EU Constitution was rejected in France and Holland, did not alter the UK constitution.

But lawyers for Mr Wheeler, a major Conservative Party donor, say the rejected Constitution and the proposed Treaty are the same in all but name.

They say the obligation to hold the promised referendum cannot be avoided simply by a name change.

The two-day case is being heard by Lord Justice Richards and Mr Justice Mackay at the High Court in London days before a referendum on the Treaty in Ireland.

An Irish "No" vote on Thursday would kill it because it must be passed unanimously by all 27 states.

Mr Wheeler has raised between £160,000 and £170,000 from donors in addition to his own money to provide a fighting fund.

He said in a statement that his legal team will try to prove the refusal to hold a referendum was "not only immoral but illegal, too".

He said: "This was a referendum the people of Britain were promised well before the last election, during it, and after it.

"But instead of fulfilling that promise, Gordon Brown has tried to push the Constitution in via the back door by rebranding a document and presenting it as a completely different text.

"This is a ridiculous argument. Leaders across Europe - including Valery Giscard d'Estaing, the author of the EU Constitution - have acknowledged, indeed almost gloated about the fact, that the Treaty is the Constitution in all but name.

"Furthermore, regardless of what name it is given, the vast majority of the British public want a referendum on this Treaty as demonstrated by the results of a YouGov poll last month."

A Foreign Office spokesman said: "Hardline Eurosceptics brought similar cases in respect of earlier European treaties, so this case is no surprise. Those challenges all failed.

"We are confident of the strength of our case on this occasion and look forward to putting our arguments before the court in more detail in due course."

Source: News.sky.com