Sir Julian, the Parliament's Grand Dame exposes the paucity of Labours federastic wing

Ooo, hark her! Sir Julian Priestly the former Secretary General of The European Parliament has coughed up a piece of bile over his morning gauffre. This man risen to a devalued knighthood for his services to the cause of the EU in Britain, alongside that other great worker against our national interests, Mr Prune, the oleaginous Sir Graham Watson). Safe is his Waterloo fastness, that town redolent of the end of a previous dream of united Europe, he fires off his turgid distress. It lands, moist and quivering, on the plate that is the website of the Labour Movement for Europe.

Apparently he is not overly keen on the results of last week's European Council. But boy does he lay his disappointment on like pancake.

Even on its own terms the December EU summit plumbs new depths of government mendacity and incompetence.

Amongst his attack is the entirely inaccurate argument that Cameron has failed on his own measure,

As to our special pleading for the banks, financial services, hedge funds etc., nothing has changed. EU financial regulation is and will continue to be decided by qualified majority. There was no veto on that; there will be no veto- quite rightly because financial services regulation is part and parcel of internal market rules. The only thing that changes is that the 26 will now develop the habit of working together on the broad range of economic policy, and that the voice of the most economically liberal, free market, high finance-friendly member state will no longer be heard. One would have to be exceptionally naïve to imagine that the 26 will refrain from discussions about any aspect of EU economic and social legislation simply out of consideration for a government that has of its own free will boycotted their meetings.

He demands that Britain should have signed up to the deal, claims that we are isolated, friendless and even thinks that Milliband is in some way better (what would Ed have done? Much the same I guess). Then he blows his own arguments away. Because he would admit, surely that signing up to something that was ill-defined and not fit for purpose is pointless.

So his claim that,

Two elements needed to solve the crisis are absent; the financial firewall has been shored up a little but without any clear undertakings from the European Central Bank, which appears to have forgotten that its core task above all others must be to preserve the currency it administers. And, most importantly, growth- not merely no plan, but hardly warranting a mention at the summit. Without a plan for growth, social, industrial and infrastructure investment, there will be no sustainable strategy for tackling the debt.

rather suggests that Cameron was right not to sign up.

Of course for Sir Julian, and why be shy about your title Sir Julian, why accept the gong if you don't use it? For Sir Julian, it isn't the realities of the situation that matter, it isn't that the EUs leaders are clueless in the face of the Frankenstein's monster of a crisis that their own ambitions have unleashed upon the peoples of Europe, it is that we are not communitaire, it is that the Prime Minister did not dash up the gunwales, to stand foursquare upon the EU's sinking ship, that so riles him.

Go back to sleep Sir Julian, switch on Euronews and let nurse tuck you in. Your dreams are all to naught and your life's work is in tatters. Such a shame.