IT is noticeable that every time Tony Blair makes a major speech about the European Union, he goes abroad to do it.

He has just been off, yet again, on another round of foreign visits.

Why is our Prime Minister so keen to expound his weird, messianic views about the UK's destiny to foreigners, but so unwilling to discuss or debate his plans with the rest of us when he is at home?

Hold a referendum on the proposed EU constitution? Certainly not, it's completely unnecessary! New Labour seems surprised that there should be all this fuss over the constitution.

They are not used to the British public taking an interest in the EU, and are usually left to carry on stealthily building their socialist superstate with out any interference from the likes of us.

The idea of this constitution was to bring EU institutions "closer to their citizens"; reduce bureaucracy; and simplify the 102,567 rules and regulations that have been heaped on us "EU Citizens" since 1973.

Instead, in typical EU style, the constitution's steering committee has decided that not only do we need another set of rules, but also more unelected bureaucrats.

The constitution makes no attempt to disguise its federalist aims. EU law "shall have primacy over the law of the member states"; members must "actively and unreservedly support the Union's common foreign and security policy"; our veto will be abolished, as it decrees "decisions of the Council shall be taken by qualified majority voting" and so on.

According to Tony Blair, we only hold referenda in the UK on "matters of constitutional change".

So, having a new constitution forced on us isn't a constitutional change then?

R G SPENCER, Malvern.