A referendum in five years time?

On 1 May 2013, the day before the local council elections in which UKIP was 'forecast to win more than 20 per cent of the vote', The Telegraph reported thus:

"The Prime Minister, who has described Ukip supporters as 'fruitcakes,' said that he was prepared to introduce legal safeguards before the end of the current parliament to guarantee that a referendum takes place after the general election. Previously he has promised to call a vote only if he is re-elected in 2015.  

The legislation would be designed to demonstrate that he is committed to calling an in-out vote by …  

Ukip is expected to enjoy another surge in support on Thursday in local government elections."

So, in an attempt to stop the Tory faithful voting for UKIP the day after, Cameron said what he said the day before. He would give us a referendum ‘after the general election.’ A general election that would take place in two years time. If we vote for him at that time.

If we vote for him at that time, he will give us a referedum three years after that.

All very big of him, don’t you think? A referendum in five years time if we vote him in again in 2015.

Of course, he may change his mind and not let us have that referendum if we do vote for him in 2015. The day after the next general Election he might be insisting that the words he used in 2013 meant something else entirely.

Check out what he was saying back in 2009.

Politicians are the very worst of men. They tell us what we want to hear before an election and they renege on the promises they do not wish to keep after it.

Put not your faith in those who will kiss the behind of your incontinent grandma one minute and whack you with mass migration, foreigner-first race laws, international aid budgets, the EU, Iraq, Afganistan and world-wide recession the next.

P.S. The Telegraph's 'forecast' was correct. UKIP won 'more than 20 percent of the vote.'

In fact they won 25 percent.