Theresa May is well aware that she has failed catastrophically to restrict immigration to Britain, says Peter Oborne

Back in the early Nineties when John Major was prime minister, I was a junior political reporter.

At the time, along with the majority of those in the Press, I regarded him as a very weak man and not up to the job.

Practically every day, we unleashed a fresh volley of damaging headlines. With the benefit of hindsight, I feel rather ashamed.

I have since come to believe Mr Major wasn’t that bad.

He left the economy in a very good shape — only for his successors at No 10, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, to wreck it over the following ten years.

Mr Major’s time in Downing Street, though, was ruined by toxic civil war in his party over British membership of the EU.

Many Tory MPs — stirred up by Right-winger Norman Tebbit and his protege Iain Duncan Smith — were convinced Major was hell-bent on betraying Margaret Thatcher’s legacy.

They were furious that he seemed willing to sign up to the idea of a Brussels-run EU superstate rather than to Thatcher’s famous vision of the Europe of sovereign nations.

As a result, Major’s last few years as PM were marred by bitter battles — he famously described his Tory enemies as ‘bastards’ — which destroyed his government and have left deep personal scars.

Not surprisingly, 20 years later, John Major believes the debate about the EU in the run-up to the referendum on Britain’s membership offers a long-awaited opportunity for him to wreak revenge on the Tory Right.

This is the background to Major’s fascinating interview with Jim Naughtie on the Radio 4 Today programme this week in which he sneered at Thatcher’s cherished notion of parliamentary sovereignty and declared that Britain must stay in the EU.

With breath-taking arrogance, he even suggested the British people must vote ‘Yes’ even if David Cameron fails to obtain any ‘fundamental and far-reaching change’ that the PM promised he would get from his negotiations with fellow EU leaders.

Major’s intervention was carefully orchestrated, I’m convinced, as part of an unsubtle PR campaign by the pro-Brussels lobby.

Over recent years, Major has been scrupulously careful never to speak out publicly, unless he gets explicit approval from David Cameron.

Like a ventriloquist, Cameron was cynically using Major on the eve of this week’s Brussels summit to argue the case for Britain to stay in the EU.

It should not be forgotten that Cameron and George Osborne served, as young men, in the Major government as special advisers — and at one point Cameron reported directly to him.

This means that they, too, were scarred by the Tory civil war of the Nineties — and share a desire to settle scores with the Eurosceptic Tory Right.

It has to be said that Cameron does not regard people such as arch- sceptic Iain Duncan Smith with the venomous loathing that Major has even to this day.

Nevertheless, Cameron and Osborne are wary of Duncan Smith and his friends — believing that they do not fit their vision of a modernised 21st-century Conservative party.

Like John Major, the Chancellor and the Prime Minister therefore believe the EU referendum offers the opportunity to consign the Tory Right to history.

At the moment, they think their plan is going smoothly.

David Cameron served as a special adviser in the Major government — and at one point Cameron reported directly to him

Conservative Party headquarters is in the hands of Cameron cronies such as beleaguered Lord Feldman, while Osborne has seized personal charge of the negotiations with the EU.

Meanwhile, Eurosceptic Cabinet ministers cannot argue in support of the ‘No’ campaign. As a result, the ‘No’ campaign feels increasingly neutered.

It also suffers from being hampered by the position of the Labour Party.

Though pro-EU (despite its leader Jeremy Corbyn having a long personal history of Euroscepticism), Labour has not made any constructive renegotiation proposals.

This is why I believe it is vital that Cabinet members who want Britain to leave the EU — and who have been silent — speak their mind.

This brings me to the position of Home Secretary Theresa May.

As a rising politician in the Nineties, she made her reputation as a Eurosceptic — on the same side as the ‘bastards’ whom John Major hated so much.

Over the past five-and-a-half years, she has built a reputation as Britain’s longest- serving Home Secretary — and the most tricky subject in her in-tray is immigration.

And this, of course, is the policy area that lies at the heart of Cameron’s bitter argument with European leaders.

At Tory conference in October, Mrs May made it clear where she stood on mass immigration, speaking passionately about how it damaged social cohesion and of the need to control Britain’s borders.

Mrs May is well aware, however, that she has failed catastrophically to restrict immigration to Britain — and the reason for her failure is EU laws that allow free movement for workers between member states. Thus, if she publicly supports Britain’s continued membership, she will look hypocritical and ridiculous.

Alternatively, she can intervene powerfully in the debate by setting out in clear language what David Cameron must demand if Britain is to genuinely regain control of its own borders and thus reduce the number of migrants.

Such an intervention would electrify the referendum campaign.

But she needs to do this now. Any later — and John Major will, indeed, secure his revenge over the ‘bastards’ he believes ruined his premiership.

Much more important, the country will sleepwalk into remaining part of an utterly unreformed and sclerotic EU.

That would be a disaster not just for Britain — but for all of Europe and the rest of the world.

A June EU vote would be illegal

George Osborne has put his many sycophants in the media to work to press the case for the referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU to be held as soon as possible.

The Chancellor wants it to take place in the early summer so that David Cameron can then clear the decks and prepare for his standing down as Tory leader — paving the way for Mr Osborne to succeed him and become Prime Minister.

However, I have news for George and his chums: the referendum cannot take place until the autumn at the earliest.

The fact is that an early referendum is not possible because it will be blocked by the Electoral Commission, which insists that at least ten months should elapse between Royal Assent being given for a referendum and the vote itself.

I am indebted for this information to the indomitable campaigning writer Dr Richard North.

The Referendum Act got its Royal Assent on Thursday. This means that the referendum cannot be held until next October — at the earliest.

Of course, the recommendations of the Electoral Commission could be ignored, but woe betide any politician who meddles with the lawful procedures in what will be the most important and hotly debated vote for many decades.

The RSPCA has the privilege of operating under Royal Charter - but Peter Oborne says the Queen should step down as patron

The Queen should quit the RSPCA

For many years, the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) has been one of Britain’s most respected and loved national institutions.

Founded by (among others) the great anti-slave trade campaigner William Wilberforce, it reflected the basic decency of the British people and our innate love of animals.

But over the past two decades, the charity seems to have changed from a revered organisation that cares for animals into a politically motivated campaigning outfit which spends too much time targeting human beings.

Yesterday, details emerged of the heartless way in which the RSPCA has been raising its funds. Unforgivably, it preys on people whose relatives have recently died.

In one horrifying case, a woman was sent a letter by the RSPCA, asking if her father was dead yet.

For its part, the RSPCA claims the letter was respectful and sent some months before the man died.

Even so, such appalling behaviour is consistent with previous conduct by the RSPCA, which once pursued a retired Army officer who had dementia, making dozens of requests for cash each year, despite being asked to desist.

The RSPCA has the privilege of operating under Royal Charter (normally granted to only institutions with a record of exemplary conduct) and its inspectors have special legal status and certain statutory powers.

These powers, I believe, are being abused.

It’s painful to say this about an organisation that has achieved so much good over the best part of two centuries, but the RSPCA is at risk of becoming an out-of-control group of political activists.

Two years ago, the Archbishop of Canterbury sensibly declined an invitation to become a vice-patron of the charity.