Denis_Cooper 5pts OE, I note that you state in today's bulletin, and also here, that "the Treaties provide for “different paths” of integration that “do not compel all member states to aim for a common destination.”". However the context of that in Tusk's paper is:"The Treaties already contain specific provisions whereby some Member States are entitled not to take part in or are exempted from the application of certain provisions of EU law. The references to an ever closer union among the peoples are therefore compatible with different paths of integration being available for different Member States and do not compel all Member States to aim for a common destination."From which it is clear that the default position for all member states is in fact a process of ever closer union leading to a common destination, and the only exceptions in terms of both process and ultimate destination can be those cases where a member state has taken care to get one of those "specific provisions" written into the treaties, usually in the form of a protocol giving it a special exemption, and then persists in retaining that special exemption in perpetuity.Does this really square with what Cameron originally said in his Bloomberg speech?"The European Treaty commits the Member States to “lay the foundations of an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe” ... We understand and respect the right of others to maintain their commitment to this goal. But for Britain – and perhaps for others - it is not the objective. And we would be much more comfortable if the Treaty specifically said so ... "Wouldn't that require the UK to have a global opt-out from all aspects of "ever closer union" to be written into the treaties, not just continuing with the collection of specific exemptions which we already have in the form of protocols, while as now still being committed to the process of "ever closer union" in every other respect?How would it modify the federalising attitude of the Court of Justice to restate the obvious, that at present the UK and indeed other member states have certain protocols to the treaties providing them with certain specific, limited, and in the long term probably temporary, opt-outs?