There are a number of fundamental differences between the two sets of circumstances:
The Maastricht Treaty was nowhere near so far reaching in its provisions.
The Treaty of Lisbon commits member states to complete subjugation by everything other than in name. The individual provisions may seem innocuous, but there is a clause which says (in effect) that the EU becomes the supreme body and can enact further provisions (i.e. control) over member states as it sees fit without further agreement being necessary.
It introduces �qualified majority voting� which effectively means that if the majority of member states vote through measures which are not in the UK�s interests we cannot opt out of them.
The Treaty of Lisbon is irreversible by this or any future government. No legislation in the nation�s history has bound its successors.
In short, it will ultimately relegate the Westminster Parliament to the status of a parish council, and it will simply act under "devolved powers" from Brussels.
As I�ve said in other threads on this topic, the majority of people may well be happy with this. However, we should be asked, as we were promised and it is dishonest of the Government to hide behind the change of name.