I read with intertest William Rees-Mogg's comments in the Times on
David Cameron'...

He said:

"Mr Cameron then decided, having done his bit to give the UKIP the publicity it badly needed, that he would be wise to shut up. He did not refer at all to Europe in his leader's speech in Manchester on Saturday. This omission, however, made his speech sound strangely lop-sided, since most of his main themes had a European aspect that he did not mention…If they are to regain the trust of moderate Eurosceptics, who are among their own voters, they will have to define their European policy in frank terms. Silence on Europe will not be good enough."

Let's be clear, the reason why Mr Cameron didn’t mention Europe in his speech is because he cannot unite his party on this issue. Already, the little he HAS said is dividing his party badly. If he sticks to his promise to take the Tories out of the European People’s party group in the European Parliament, most of his MEPs would rebel and stay put. Those that didn't would end up sitting with members even more “loony” than UKIPs.

Cameron would have loved the cheap applause he would have got from his first conference if he had been able to announce the withdrawal from the EPP. But, he knows the price he would have to pay in terms of external credibility and internal divisions would be too high.

Far easier to ignore the issue and hope that no one notices that six months after he promised withdrawal, his MEPs are still with the EPP.