WHAT THE EU TREATY OF LISBON DOES(legally accurate).

[Sub-X]

Deception of Declarations - The Lisbon II Con
http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=686
5 December 2008

A Government-led Yes campaign in a Lisbon II referendum will be seeking to deceive people that Declarations to be made by the Irish and other Governments regarding various aspects of Lisbon will make a difference to that Treaty, when they do not.

The EU Governments do not  intend to change a jot or tittle of the Lisbon Treaty, for the slightest change would make it a new Treaty.  And any such changes would have to be ratified from scratch by all 27 EU States again.

Please note  that the difference between a Protocol and  a Declaration attaching to a Treaty is fundamentally important.

Declarations are not legally binding. They are merely  political statements or promises, made by one state unilaterally or by several States collectively.

Unlike the headings -  usually called  Titles and Chapters - of a Treaty and any Protocols that may be attached to it, Declarations  do not form part of its legally binding text. There are several such Declarations already appended to the Lisbon Treaty.

These are NOT legally binding on the States party to the Treaty. There are also several Protocols attached to Lisbon. These ARE legally binding, quite as much as the main text of that Treaty.

The EU Court of Justice interprets EU Treaties. An EC/EU Treaty means what the Court of Justice (ECJ) says it means in relation to any issue in dispute. Political Declarations canot override the provisions of a Treaty, which the ECJ would interpret if called upon. They therefore cannot bind the ECJ.

European law, which derives from the EU/EC Treaties, has sprimacy over  all national and domestic law with which it may be in conflict. It also overrides any international treaties  having domestic effect with which European law may be in conflict. And it is the EU Court of Justice  which is the final arbiter of what European law covers and what the EC/EU Treaties mean. Declarations would have no effect on that.

Related :New Poll - 70% reject a second Lisbon referendum

[Amd304912]

57% would vote No in a Treaty rerun.

thats a bush fail number, only 43 yes.

[Sub-X]

57% would vote No in a Treaty rerun.

thats a bush fail number, only 43 yes.

Ah if only the Lisbon Treaty was as irrelevant as Bush,we would have nothing to worry about,sadly most people don't understand that for the concessions we want to be implemented legally,means the Treaty would have to be renegotiate,so not unlike Bush it's all just hot air,they will pull out all the stops to get this through.

Ding...Ding,Seconds Away,Round 2     

[Amd304912]

just hope brussels 2 is realized same as realized as brussels 1, just like the fascist started way back when with rockefeller.

[Sub-X]

President Gracefully Brushes Off Illogical EU Assault
http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=690
6 December 2008

Meeting between Václav Klaus (President of the Czech Republic and the next presidency holder of the EU) and members of the Conference of the Presidents of the European Parliament, Friday 5 December 2008, Prague Castle

Daniel Cohn-Bendit MEP: I brought you a flag, which - as we heard - you have everywhere here at the Prague Castle. It is the flag of the European Union, so I will place it here in front of you.

It will be a tough Presidency. The Czech Republic will have to deal with the work directive and climate package. EU climate package represents less than what our fraction would wish for. It will be necessary to hold on to the minimum of that. I am certain that the climate change represents not only a risk, but also a danger for the future development of the planet. My view is based on scientific views and majority approval of the EP and I know you disagree with me. You can believe what you want, I don’t believe, I know that global warming is a reality.

[lisbon Treaty] I don’t care about your opinions on it. I want to know what you are going to do if the Czech Chamber of Deputies and the Senate approve it. Will you respect the will of the representatives of the people? You will have to sign it.

I want you to explain to me what is the level of your friendship with Mr Ganley from Ireland. How can you meet a person whose funding is unclear? You are not supposed to meet him in your function. It is a man whose finances come from problematic sources and he wants to use them to be funding his election campaign into the EP.


President Vaclav Klaus: I must say that nobody has talked to me in such a style and tone for the past 6 years. You are not on the barricades in Paris here. I thought that these manners ended for us 18 years ago but I see I was wrong. I would not dare to ask how the activities of the Greens are funded. If you are concerned about a rational discussion in this half an hour, which we have, please give the floor to someone else, Mr Chairman.

EU Parliament President Hans-Gert Pöttering: No, we have plenty of time. My colleague will continue, because anyone from the members of the EP can ask you whatever he likes. (to Cohn-Bendit:) Please continue.

President Vaclav Klaus: This is incredible. I have never experienced anything like this before.

Daniel Cohn-Bendit: Because you have not experienced me..


Pesident Vaclav Klaus: This is incredible.


Daniel Cohn-Bendit: We have always had good talks with President Havel. And what will you tell me about your attitude towards the anti-discrimination law? I will gladly inform you about our funding.


Hans-Gert Pöttering: Brian Crowley, please.


Brian Crowley MEP: I am from Ireland and I am a member of a party in government. All his life my father fought against the British domination. Many of my relatives lost their lives. That is why I dare to say that the Irish wish for the Lisbon Treaty. It was an insult, Mr. President, to me and to the Irish people what you said during your state visit to Ireland. It was an insult that you met Declan Ganley, a man with no elected mandate. This man has not proven the sources from which his campaign was funded. I just want to inform you what the Irish felt. I wish you that you get the programme of your Presidency through and you will get through what European citizens want to see.


President Vaclav Klaus: Thank you for this experience which I gained from this meeting. I did not think anything like this is possible and have not experienced anything like this for the past 19 years. I thought it was a matter of the past that we live in democracy, but it is post-democracy, really, which rules the EU.

You mentioned the European values. The most important value is freedom and democracy. The citizens of the EU member states are concerned about freedom and democracy, above all. But democracy and freedom are loosing ground in the EU today. It is necessary to strive for them and fight for them.

I would like to emphasize, above all, what most citizens of the Czech Republic feel, that for us the EU membership has no alternative. It was me who submitted the EU application in the year 1996 and who signed the Accession treaty in 2003. But the arrangements within the EU have many alternatives. To take one of them as sacrosanct, untouchable, about which it is not possible to doubt or criticize it, is against the very nature of Europe.

As for the Lisbon Treaty, I would like to mention that it is not ratified in Germany either. The Constitutional Treaty, which was basically the same as the Lisbon Treaty, was refused in referendums in other two countries. If Mr. Crowley speaks of an insult to the Irish people, then I must say that the biggest insult to the Irish people is not to accept the result of the Irish referendum. In Ireland I met somebody who represents a majority in his country. You, Mr. Crowley, represent a view which is in minority in Ireland. That is a tangible result of the referendum.


Brian Crowley MEP: With all respect, Mr. President, you will not tell me what the Irish think. As an Irishman, I know it best.


President Vaclav Klaus: I do not speculate about what the Irish think. I state the only measurable data which were proved by the referendum.

In our country the Lisbon Treaty is not ratified because our parliament has not decided on it yet. It is not the President’s fault. Let’s wait for the decision of both Chambers of the Parliament, that is the current phase of the ratification process in which the President plays no role whatsoever. I cannot sign the Treaty today, it is not on my table, it is up to the parliament to decide about it now. My role will come after the eventual approval of the Treaty in the Parliament. . .


Hans-Gert Pöttering: … In the conclusion - and I want to leave this room in good terms - I would like to say that it is more than unacceptable, if you compare us, compare us with the Soviet Union. We are all deeply rooted in our countries and our constituencies. We are concerned about freedom and reconciliation in Europe, we are good willing, not naive.


Presaident Vaclav Klaus: I did not compare you with the Soviet Union, I did not mention the word “Soviet Union”. I only said that I have not experienced such an atmosphere, such style of debate in the past 19 years in the Czech Republic, really.

[Sub-X]

'Our economy will suffer if we're on fringes of Europe'
Irish Independent
6 December 2008

Taoiseach Brian Cowen last night warned that Ireland's economic difficulties will be impossible to reverse if the country is on the fringes of Europe.

The warning from Mr Cowen comes just a week before a meeting of EU leaders, where he is being advised to formally announce a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty will take place next year.

In an impassioned speech to Fianna Fail supporters, Mr Cowen linked the rejected Treaty to the state of the economy and also warned of further cutbacks to come as a result of the deterioration of the public finances.

"The scale of the task in front of us is underlined by the fact that we will have to take further corrective action in addition to the decisions already taken in the Budget.

"Less available money for public spending also reinforces the imperative for pragmatic reforms," he said.

Insisting that membership of the EU is intrinsic to Ireland crawling back out of recession, the Taoiseach said it would be "ill-advised" to put the benefits of EU membership at risk.

In his keynote address to the Fianna Fail faithful at the party's annual dinner last night, he said those who argue that Europe is irrelevant are "dangerously misguided".

"A single market of almost 500 million people, with common rules for all, provides major trade, investment and job opportunities for Ireland.

"We would be ill-advised to put these gains at risk," he said.

Pointing to his meetings with EU leaders this week, Mr Cowen said it was seeking ways to allay concerns following Ireland's rejection of the Lisbon Treaty.

"It is important that we deal comprehensively with these concerns so we can place Ireland back where we should be, at the centre of European affairs. It would be very difficult to deal with prevailing economic difficulties from a fringe position in the EU," he said.

Decisions

Mr Cowen also said the Government was finalising decisions on the recapitalisation of the banks "so they can lend in a fashion that meets the needs of the economy".

Mr Cowen said the recent Exchequer returns confirm a greater deterioration as the recession spreads throughout the economy.

"Our tax revenues are down by nearly €8bn. This means we are budgeting for services in 2009 on the basis of a tax take equivalent to 2005. That is not a sustainable position into the future," he said. "The very fact that this is as severe a global recession as any of us may have seen before means there are no quick fixes and no short cuts to recovery," he added.

In his first speech as Taoiseach at the annual Cairde Fail dinner, Mr Cowen mentioned his predecessor, Bertie Ahern, twice, and commended him on his work.

"He, and other former colleagues, remain available at all times to provide their advice and counsel to those of us entrusted with the leadership of the party in the period ahead," he said.

Special guests at the dinner included Irish rugby manager Declan Kidney, All-Ireland winning Kilkenny hurling manager Brian Cody, Offaly's first camogie All-Star Michaela Morkan and the Rose of Tralee Aoife Kelly.

Ahead of next week's EU summit, where Ireland's approach to the Lisbon dilemma will be finalised, Mr Cowen is being advised to announce next week that Ireland will hold a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

After meeting with French president Nicolas Sarkozy, Mr Cowen said he was "more hopeful and more optimistic" of reaching an agreement that would allow the Government to proceed with a second shot at passing Lisbon.A second referendum is inevitable if Ireland is to ratify the treaty and it is felt by some that Mr Cowen has nothing to lose by coming out and revealing what is being dubbed "the worst kept secret in town".

The bonus from such a move is that it would reassure fellow European leaders and set out his intent. The drawback is it will kickstart the "No to Lisbon II" campaign. "The dogs in the street know it's going to be next October. There is not much to be got from dragging it out further. It would be naive to suggest the campaign hasn't already started," a senior source said. After three days of whistle-stop tours of European capitals, Mr Cowen has now touched base on his outline plan with all the major players: Mr Sarkozy, who currently holds the EU Presidency, German chancellor Angela Merkel, British prime minister Gordon Brown, Luxembourg prime minister Jean-Claude Juncker and European Commission President Jose-Manuel Barroso.

"We are happy with the progress that we are making. We are putting our case to our colleagues," Mr Cowen said.

[Sub-X]

Deal on Lisbon II 'still uncertain'
Irish Independent
8 December 2008

NEGOTIATIONS on when the the referendum for the rejected Lisbon Treaty might be re-run will feature in this week's crunch talks in Brussels, Foreign Affairs Minister Micheal Martin said yesterday.

However, Mr Martin signalled that it was far from certain that a deal will be reached on how to deal with the current impasse, and in particular the issue of retaining a permanent European Commissioner.

Asked if there is a timescale under discussion for a possible re-run of the vote, Mr Martin said it "obviously will feature in terms of the negotiations towards the end of the week and as far as we are concerned, one cannot contemplate that until we are satisfied that in any conclusions we arrive at next week, they will reflect the obvious and genuine concerns of the Irish people".

The Foreign Affairs Minister also made a very direct link between any future vote on the Lisbon Treaty and Ireland's membership of the EU.

In the meantime, finding agreement on the number of European Commissioners could prove difficult.

"That's a key issue we have to resolve," he said. "Clearly the Irish people are of the view and the research from Millward Brown shows that up to 80pc of the Irish people believe that the Commissionership is a very important issue for Ireland."

With the Taoiseach due to outline the "elements of a solution" on Thursday and Friday, Mr Martin said a "very difficult week" lay ahead.

"Member states have different perspectives on issues, particularly in terms of the composition of the Commission," he said. "Hopefully, we will be in a position to resolve this by Thursday or Friday but it's not certain at this stage."

In addition to finding agreement on the European Commissioners, "strong assurances" will also be sought in the areas of defence, neutrality, abortion and taxation. Given the current economic turmoil, next year will prove a "fundamental year" for Ireland, just as 1972 and 1957 proved when Ireland took "profound decisions" about becoming more involved in European and global affairs.

"The fundamental question is one of orientation. Does Ireland want to be at the heart of Europe, making substantial and influential contributions, or does Ireland want to move to the margins of Europe in terms of influence and in terms of contribution," he said.

Last night, Labour's European spokesman Joe Costello heaped criticism on the Government for failing to consult with opposition parties on solving the current impasse.

"The Labour Party for its part is not going to be steamrolled into a Government package on the Lisbon aftermath," he said.

Meanwhile, Libertas chief Declan Ganley hopes to upstage the Taoiseach at his crunch meetings in Brussels on Thursday and Friday. The Irish Independent understands that a major press conference is planned for their new headquarters in Brussels, at which Mr Ganley will outline plans for the European elections and their candidate line-up.

In Brussels last night, Fine Gael's Paschal Donohoe who chaired the Oireachtas committee on Ireland's future in the EU, told a meeting of European People's Parliament foreign ministers that 'No' voters had legitimate concerns, which needed to be addressed.

[Sub-X]

Czech President tussles with Danny the Red on Lisbon
http://euobserver.com/9/27247
8 December 2008

A meeting between Czech President Vaclav Klaus and a top-level delegation of MEPs descended into verbal fisticuffs on Friday (5 December) after the co-leader of the Greens in the parliament attacked Mr Klaus for his opposition to the Lisbon treaty and his relations with Irish No campaigner Declan Ganley.

"I don't care about your opinions on [the Lisbon treaty]. I want to know what you will do if both the Czech Chamber of Deputies and the Senate approve it," Green MEP Daniel Cohn-Bendit asked, according to a transcript of the meeting - designed to debate the upcoming Czech EU presidency - published by Mr Klaus.

"Will you respect the will of the people's representatives? You will have to sign it."

The German Green also called on the Czech president to explain the level of his relations with Declan Ganley, the founder of the Ireland's Libertas group, which emerged before the June vote to fight the treaty.

"A man in your position is not supposed to meet him," he said, citing "unclear" and "problematic" funding of Mr Ganley's political activities.

Mr Klaus responded by saying that nobody had talked to him in such a way in the six years since he was elected president, calling the conversation "unprecedented."

"You are not on the Paris barricades here," he said, referring to the Green leader's past life as a 1968 Paris protester. "I thought that these practices had ended for us 19 years ago. I see I was wrong. I would not dare to ask how the Greens' activities are funded," Mr Klaus said.

Others in the parliamentary delegation then entered the fray, with Irish MEP Brian Crowley telling Mr Klaus he was offending Ireland.

"By meeting [Mr] Ganley, you insulted the Irish people. That man has failed to [disclose] the funding of his campaign. It is an insult to meet someone without a mandate. I just want to inform you how the Irish feel," Mr Crowley said.

Mr Klaus responded that the biggest insult to the Irish is the refusal to accept their vote in the referendum.

"I met someone representing a majority view in Ireland, while you, Mr Crowley, represent a minority opinion. That is the tangible result of the referendum," he said, which only won him further criticism from the MEPs.

"You will not tell me what the Irish think. As an Irishman, I know it best," Mr Crowley insisted.

Bumpy road to treaty ratification

Meanwhile, the Czech Republic's ruling conservative Civic Democrats (ODS) have agreed to open the door to Lisbon treaty ratification, as long as the opposition Social Democrats (CSSD) accept US plans for placing part of its missile defence shield on Czech soil.

At their party congress on Sunday (7 December), the Civic Democrats "strongly recommended" that their legislators first approve the US-Czech agreement on the American plan and then allow for a vote on the Lisbon Treaty by deputies and senators.

The Chamber of Deputies is expected to debate the Lisbon treaty at an extraordinary session on Tuesday (9 December) - a move initiated by the Social Democrats.

According to the ANSA news agency, the Czech prime minister, Mirek Topolanek, confirmed that the vote on the Lisbon treaty and the US radar should be linked. "If the Social Democrats reject the shield, we will reject Lisbon," he said on Sunday.

Asked when parliament will vote on the Lisbon Treaty, he said it was "hard to say," but added that it would be "for sure" during the Czech EU presidency term.

The Czech Republic takes over the EU's rotating presidency from the French in January, and will be at the helm of the 27-country bloc until June.

[Sub-X]

New Lisbon vote to be delayed until Irish concerns met
Irish Independent
9 December 2008

NO DECISION can be taken for several months on the timing of a new Lisbon Treaty referendum, European Affairs Minister Dick Roche says.

The minister also says some EU member states are reluctant to concede to the Government's demand that every country retain its European Commissioner, but it is a key issue for Ireland.

Mr Roche has previously stated that a referendum would have to be held if the treaty is to be ratified by this country.

Ahead of this week's EU Summit, Mr Roche told the Irish Independent that the time for deciding on the actual timing of Ireland's ratification won't come until after the entire EU has agreed on a "legally robust mechanism"(which is impossible unless the Treaty is rewritten to include such concessions) that will meet the concerns that led to the No vote in last June's referendum.

"It is likely to take months of very detailed discussions before we reach the point," he says.

The minister admits the issue of keeping the permanent European Commissioner is a sticking point, but he believes a deal can be struck.

"We recognise that some member states are reluctant to concede to the Government's demand that every EU state should retain the right to appoint a Commissioner permanently, however, this is a key issue for us," he said.(Why would other countries be reluctant to want to retain the right to appoint their own Commissioner ,this makes no sense at all. )

"The Taoiseach has made it clear that while we respect the views of others, this is a key issue for Ireland and a key concern of the Irish people. Following the very intensive round of discussions we believe that this is an area where agreement can be achieved, increasingly the logic of our position is recognised," he added.

When asked when the Government would have to hold a second referendum to ratify the treaty, the minister explained why it wasn't possible to say at this point in time.

"It is too early to talk about a date for a new referendum. The primary aim for the Government must be to see if the fears and concerns of the Irish people as reflected in the June 12 result can be addressed.

"The Government can only revisit the ratification process if, and only if, that happens. That is the appropriate and logical order in which to deal with the current position," he said.

Mr Roche reiterated Taoiseach Brian Cowen's view that the plan is still a work in progress and no decisions have yet been taken.

"We can only commit to ratification of Lisbon if the concerns -- taxation, social and ethical issues and defense -- of the Irish people are met by means of a legally robust set of mechanisms, and when the issue of the Commission is resolved."

Mr Roche said the Lisbon Treaty itself provides a way for each country to keep its Commissioner.(Which they are reluctant to retain ,this makes even less sense.)

Trigger

"What is necessary is a commitment to trigger the Lisbon mechanism when Lisbon is ratified by all 27 states to continue the position that every member state will have the right to nominate a Commission member. The Lisbon mechanism can only be operated if all 27 member states ratify," he said.

"One of the ironies of the No vote on June 12 is that by rejecting Lisbon, we locked the EU into the Nice Treaty process that provides for a Commission of less than 27 Commissioners next year, a position than can only be reversed if the Lisbon Treaty is ratified by all the member states," he added. (  Nice try Mr.Cock Roach.)

(Added by me)

[Sub-X]

Barroso backs one commissioner per country principle
http://euobserver.com/9/27265
9 December 2008

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - European Commission chief Jose Manuel Barroso has thrown his weight behind the idea of preserving the one country, one commissioner principle - the key pre-condition for Ireland to rerun a referendum on the failed Lisbon Treaty.

"I think it should not be a problem to have a commission with 27 members or more," Mr Barroso said on Tuesday (9 December) - hours before all 27 EU leaders meet later this week for what he called the "most crucial summit in recent years."

"We have empirical evidence it is possible for a commission to work with 27 members (...) If it is a very important condition for Ireland I personally will support it," he added.

Under the Lisbon Treaty, the EU's executive should slim down in 2014 so that it embraces representatives from only two-thirds of EU countries, with each capital represented in two commissions out of three.

The idea is to streamline the decision-making as the EU bloc has been expanding. During the two latest enlargements, some commissioners' portfolios were split in order to accommodate newcomers.

But Mr Barroso stressed that the pending legal document allowed to preserve the current state of play - one commissioner per country principle - and argued that it had been "paradoxically" easier to reach a compromise at the bigger table.

"I am convinced that we can respond to [Irish] national concerns, while finding a European solution," he said, adding that "The overriding goal of the EU council must be to set out a credible way forward, which will enable Ireland to ratify [the treaty]."

According to one EU diplomat speaking to EUobserver, Irish Taoiseach Brian Cowen is set to confront his counterparts with two requests that would form a "strong platform" for Ireland to hold a second referendum on the failed treaty.

The first one is linked to the commission issue, while the second one speaks of so-called "legal guarantees" in the field of neutrality, taxation, labour law and in ethical matters such as abortion and gay marriage.

Irish leader is not going to receive hands up from all sitting at the table, however, as a handful of countries - namely Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands - are sticking to the Lisbon Treaty ambition of having a slimmer executive body eventually.

On the other hand, recent EU members tend to identify with the Irish stance, as they view their commission representatives as an important information link to the executive body.

Italy and France have also shown some sympathy for the Irish demand, a diplomat said.

Regarding the request for so-called legal guarantees in three sensitive policy areas, one scenario floated in EU circles suggests that those guarantees could be tied with another EU treaty - such as the first new accession treaty. This would allow avoiding any obligation of a fresh round of ratifications of the Lisbon Treaty.

Given the legal complexity of the issue, a diplomat said that the second Irish referendum will arrive no earlier than in September or October 2009 - meaning that the European Parliament elections held in June will follow the current Nice Treaty rules.

"The European elections will most likely be held under the Nice Treaty," the commission president, Jose Barroso, told journalists in Brussels.

[Sub-X]

Irish minister fudges Lisbon treaty question
http://euobserver.com/9/27264
9 December 2008

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - Irish foreign minister Micheal Martin declined to clarify his country's position on holding a second referendum on the Lisbon treaty next year, despite reports of an impending announcement.

"We have not decided to hold a referendum," he told a packed crowd of Brussels officials and journalists at a meeting on Monday (8 December) held by the European Policy Centre, an EU think-tank.

But when pressed if he saw any other way out of the impasse other than a second referendum, he responded: "I'm not a constitutional lawyer. There are perhaps other ways, but they are fraught with risks."

The UK's Daily Telegraph had earlier the same day cited unnamed Irish diplomats as saying Taoisheach Brian Cowen will at the EU summit on Thursday (11 December) declare that a second vote will be held in October 2009, or possibly in April 2009.

EU leaders are to meet in Brussels to consider the Lisbon conundrum, as well as enter into final negotiations on the bloc's climate and energy package and assess the current economic situation.

When challenged if a second referendum might be seen as "insulting" to Irish people when voters in France and the Netherlands - who also voted against an earlier incarnation of the treaty - would not be forced to vote once again, he added: "In a democracy, I don't think it is insulting to ask people a question. The important thing is to listen to the people."

The minister said his government had taken the time to analyse in depth not only why people voted for or against the Lisbon treaty, but also their general attitudes towards Brussels.

"We found most have a very positive attitude towards the EU - 70 percent believe that it has been a positive thing for Ireland."

Ireland's demands?

Mr Martin outlined five key reasons for the No vote, which could form the backbone of Dublin's demands from other EU states to help them push an amended treaty package through.

The biggest reason for voting No was worries over threats to Ireland's traditional neutrality. "This was a very strong issue. This came through clearly in our research," he told the room.

Irish citizens were also very concerned about "competence creep" from Brussels and especially the European Court of Justice, which is seen as gradually encroaching into domestic jurisdiction. He said this notably took the form of fears that Ireland's protection of "the right to life of the unborn" would at some point be undone.

Days after the June referendum, a European Commission Eurobarometer survey of the reasons why people had voted No showed that conservative fears that Europe might impose legalised abortion, gay marriage and euthanasia on Ireland was an issue for only two percent of voters on the No side.

Mr Martin said that abortion and these other "ethical issues" combined with other reasons in the minds of the voters: "I don't mean they all voted that way, but it was a factor in their heads."

Taxation, a strong theme of free-market-oriented No campaign group Libertas, also proved to be prominent in voters' heads.

"A full third believed that the treaty undermined national competence in direct taxation," said the minister.

Mr Martin told the meeting that workers' rights and social issues figured significantly in the popular imagination as well, saying that people were worried about recent European Court of Justice decisions that appeared to limit people's right to strike and collective bargaining.

"We're open to suggestions from the commission on how to copperfasten these rights and deliver enhanced protections for workers," he added.

The fifth issue was the reduction in the number of commissioners outlined in the Lisbon treaty. According to the treaty, in future only two thirds of the member states would maintain a commissioner at any given time. "Critically, losing a commissioner was a key worry, with 80 percent rating the issue as of very high importance," he said.

Commissioner conundrum

"If the Treaty of Lisbon is to enter into force, it requires the agreement of all member states," the minister said. "If that is to be secured, the concerns of the Irish people will have to be addressed in a clear and convincing manner by means of legally binding assurances."

He apologised for not being more precise in his response, but, "it will all become clear by the end of the week," he said.

However, Ireland's plans may get a bumpy ride from other member states. Foreign ministers, meeting in Brussels on Monday ahead of the summit considered Dublin's requests.

After the meeting, Slovak foreign minister Jan Kubis said: "I suppose the Irish will get some support from EU leaders at the summit, suggesting they will listen to their concerns and try to work on them in the coming months, but it is clear that they will not just copy all of their demands and accept them."

Mr Kubis added that most countries would mainly have a problem accepting changes in the institutional make-up of the European Commission, as this may require a new round of treaty ratification - a move most countries oppose.

[Sub-X]

US congressmen rebuff Irish anti-Lisbon links
http://euobserver.com/9/27276
10 December 2008

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - US congress members have poured cold water on a European Parliament query about potential foreign funding for the anti-Lisbon treaty campaign in Ireland, in line with expectations.

"Our congressional colleagues drew our attention to a statement from US deputy secretary of state John Negroponte at Trinity College Dublin on 17 November, completely refuting the suggestion of any US dimension whatsoever," British conservative MEP Jonathan Evans told EUobserver on Wednesday (9 December), after returning from a European Parliament delegation to the US.

"On the contrary, both Democrats and Republicans re-affirmed their keenness to work with a strong and coherent EU, comments recently accentuated by president-elect Obama," he added.

German socialist MEP Helmut Kuhne asked US lawmakers at the meeting in Miami if the US government had in any way supported Irish businessman Declan Ganley, whose Libertas organisation was among groups which campaigned for a No vote in the Irish referendum in June.

The query was made following informal instructions from the office of European Parliament President Hans-Gert Poettering, after German green MEP Daniel Cohn-Bendit in September suggested the Pentagon or the CIA may have helped Mr Ganley in order to weaken the EU.

Mr Cohn-Bendit continued in a similar vein last week at a meeting with Czech President Vaclav Klaus, saying Mr Klaus should not have met with Mr Ganley during a recent state visit to Dublin because of the "problematic" financing of the businessman's political activity.

When asked in Dublin last month if the US government had helped Libertas, Mr Negroponte said: "absolutely not. I say that on very good authority, not only being deputy secretary of state but also being a former director of national intelligence."

Mr Ganley's company, Rivada Networks, makes communications equipment for the US government. But he has denied any US link to Libertas and promised to take Irish politicians to court for "grossly defamatory" statements on the subject.

The Irish government is widely expected to run a second referendum on Lisbon in October 2009, after negotiating a package of sweeteners from EU states at this week's summit.

The package is set to include keeping an Irish commissioner and securing declarations to protect Irish neutrality, taxation and anti-abortion laws, which would later be given legal force by being lodged at the UN or tacked on to Croatia's EU accession treaty.

Mr Ganley is likely to remain a force in European politics for some time to come. Libertas opened an office in Brussels last month as part of his plans to run in European Parliament elections in June.

Czech delay

Meanwhile, the Czech parliament on Wednesday put off until 3 February a vote on Lisbon ratification as the ruling conservative ODS party tries to secure socialist support for hosting a US anti-missile shield first.

The move means the Czech EU presidency will start work in January as the only EU state not to have voted on the treaty.

President Klaus, along with Polish President Lech Kaczynski, have also promised not to sign off on Lisbon unless Ireland overturns its No vote.

[Sub-X]

'Deal is already done' on Lisbon rerun
Irish Independent
11 December 2008

A FORMER senior MEP claimed last night that a rerun of the Lisbon Treaty vote was "a done deal" between Ireland and European Union leaders.

Danish veteran Jens Peter Bonde added that the deal means a new vote will contain declarations with lots of "nice words" that wouldn't actually change "one single paragraph" in the Lisbon Treaty text.

Mr Bonde, a noted Eurosceptic and an opponent of the Maastricht and Lisbon treaties, added: "I know that the French president has told European group leaders in the European Parliament, in confidentiality, that there is a deal now with the Irish government and the French presidency on the . . . rerun."

Mr Bonde's claims were rejected by Foreign Affairs Minister Micheal Martin, who insisted the Taoiseach was travelling to Brussels today to discuss "elements of a solution".

"No deal has been done," he said. "If a deal is done, it has to be arrived at by the 27 member states at the Council on Thursday and Friday. I can assure you that no deal has been arrived at."

With any future solution heavily reliant on Ireland being able to retain its permanent European Commissioner, Mr Martin said some states still preferred the proposed new system that allowed for a rotation of commissioners.

Conspiracy

But the minister said he was encouraged by President of the European Commission Jose Manuel Barroso's remark that he was "convinced" Irish voters' concerns could be met.

Meanwhile, an alliance of 'No' campaigners yesterday said the Government was "conspiring" behind voters' backs to rerun the treaty on the wider agenda of the economic crisis.

Pledging an "intensified effort" if there is a second referendum, Joe Higgins of the Socialist Party claimed there would be an attempt by the Government to "panic" people into voting 'Yes' to save their jobs and homes.

Patricia McKenna of the People's Movement said the Government was trying to make a link between EU membership, Lisbon and tackling the economic crisis. "The public aren't stupid and I don't believe they're going to buy into this argument," she added.

"There is now an attempt to go behind the backs of the people and to find another way to force this through, whether it be through a referendum or through some other procedure."

Sinn Fein's Aengus O Snodaigh claimed the Government was intent on getting people to "keep voting until you get the correct answer", while Roger Cole of the Peace and Neutrality Alliance (PANA) claimed a constitutional challenge was possible against the holding of a second referendum.

[Sub-X]

Ireland set for second Lisbon referendum
http://euobserver.com/9/27289
12 December 2008

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS – Ireland looks set to hold a second referendum on the EU's Lisbon Treaty next year, having almost secured a series of concessions by the other EU states on its key demands.

A document EU leaders are expected to agree on tomorrow reads: "The Irish government is committed to seeking ratification of the Lisbon Treaty by the end of the term of the current [European] Commission," in November 2009.

In exchange, EU leaders will agree that each member country will keep one commissioner in the next European Commission if the Lisbon Treaty enters into force.

In its current form, the Lisbon Treaty foresees a reduction of the commission whereby as of 2014 just two-thirds of the member states would have a commissioner at any one time. The reduction can be changed by the EU countries however, if they agree to such a move unanimously.

Dublin has said that according to their research into why their citizens voted No, keeping their commissioner had been a key concern, together with holding on to its traditional neutrality. Ireland has also sought assurances that the EU would not impose rules concerning taxation or "ethical issues", such as abortion, euthanasia and gay marriages.

Ireland has secured concessions on these points as well.

"The European Council [EU member states] has carefully noted the other concerns of the Irish people presented by the Taoiseach as set out in the statement annexed relating to taxation policy, family, social and ethical issues, and Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) with regard to Ireland's traditional policy of neutrality," reads the document.

"The European Council agrees that these concerns shall be addressed to the mutual satisfaction of Ireland and the other member states by way of the necessary legal guarantees," it continues.

The UK in particular has expressed some reserves to the declaration, however, insisting that it should be clear guarantees given to Ireland would not change the Lisbon Treaty in any way.

But speaking to journalists on Thursday night (11 December), Irish foreign minister Micheal Martin remained optimistic that all remaining issues would be solved by Friday.

"We are hopeful to get an agreement [on the document] tomorrow," he said.

At this stage, Dublin will likely obtain only "a declaration of principle" from the EU member states on its key demands, with proper "legal guarantees" later on.

"We will be working on the nature of these legal guarantees" in the coming months, Mr Martin said.

He added that if Dublin obtained the guarantees, "We will be prepared to put this to the electorate," meaning a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

The Irish first rejected the text on 12 June by a vote of 53.4 to 46.6 percent.

An Irish Times poll last month showed that given such assurances, voters would approve the treaty in a second referendum, however, with 43 percent of respondents saying they would now vote Yes, 39 percent No and 18 percent having no opinion.

[Freeski]

So they have one year to put their stuff in place.

[Sub-X]

So they have one year to put their stuff in place.

Yep,it has begun already,ding ding round 2 

Pan-Europe Libertas Party launched to fight 'anti-democratic' Brussels
http://euobserver.com/9/27286
11 December 2008

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - Declan Ganley, the Irish businessman behind the Libertas campaign group, of the key organisations that defeated the Lisbon Treaty in Ireland's referendum on the text in June, has launched Libertas as the first truly pan-European political party.

The new Libertas Party, which aims to run candidates in all 27 European Union states for the European Parliament elections in June 2009, says it wants to democratise the European institutions, with an elected commission and a president.

"We are founding the party to campaign for the people of Europe to respond to the growing anti-democratic tendency in some of the institutions in Brussels," Mr Ganley told reporters on Thursday (11 December) in the organisation's new offices just metres away the European Council building where European premiers and presidents were arriving to meet for their last summit of the year.

The Irish taoisheach, Brian Cowen, is expected at the meeting to tell European leaders that he will hold a second referendum on the treaty if his counterparts accede to two requests: A declaration that Irish taxation policy, family, social and ethical issues, and common security and defence policy with regard to Ireland's traditional policy of neutrality should all be safeguarded; and a pledge to maintain the one-commissioner-per-state principle abolished in the Lisbon Treaty.

Pointing out that a greater percentage of Irish citizens voted against the treaty than the percentage of US citizens that voted for Barack Obama, Mr Ganley said that it is undemocratic to force Ireland to hold a second referendum and that other European citizens have been prevented from voting on the text.

"We will give [the EU leaders] the referendum they did not want to give the people of Europe."

"We are at a fork in the road, between the Europe of the Lisbon Treaty, an anti-democratic Europe that does not derive its legitimacy from the citizens ... and a democratic Europe."

He insisted that the new party is not anti-EU or "eurosceptic".

"We want Europe to be strong and stand tall in the world, but based on democratic principles," he said.

"This is a pro-European organisation. There is no future for Euroscepticism. The European Union is necessary," he added.

"It is the status quo that if left as it is, will allow euro scepticism to grow."

The new party will not partner with other political parties, but rather run all its candidates under the Libertas banner in each of the EU states.

Beyond its position on democracy in Europe, Libertas' social and economic positions will be centrist, in order to attract people from across the political spectrum, although Mr Ganley was "not sure about communists."

The left in Ireland played a prominent role in campaigning against the treaty, as did the left during the French and Dutch referendums that defeated the Lisbon Treaty's precursor, the Constitutional Treaty.

However, at the press conference announcing the new party, Mr Ganley was light on policy details much beyond the treaty and the structure of the EU.

Pressed by reporters to flesh out its other positions, Mr Ganley said that the party would be broadly free-market oriented, that European defence was "very serious" and that climate change could be addressed by a pan-European competition for entrepreneurs to develop innovative new technologies.

He also said that abortion and gay marriage were not issues Libertas had campaigned on in Ireland, suggesting that these are not issues the pan-European party will either.

The party will hold a congress in Brussels the spring and hammer out its policy positions.

Mr Ganley said that no candidates had been picked yet and would not say whether any prominent politicians had signed up to his cause. He did however say that should Philippe de Villiers, the French leader of the right-wing Mouvement pour la France so wish, he would be "very pleased to have him as a candidate."

Declan Ganley said he would like to be a candidate himself, but had not yet made a decision.

The party's offices were bankrolled by Mr Ganley's Libertas Institute in Ireland, but is inspired by the online fundraising success of the Obama campaign. He encouraged EU citizens to visit Libertas.eu, and "donate a euro or a zloty or any European currency up to the €12,000 maximum."

"We badly need it," he said.

Speaking directly to voters, he said: "[Voting for Libertas] may be the only opportunity you ever have to have a referendum on Europe."

Although there are umbrella groupings in the European Parliament, such as the Party of European Socialists - the centre-left political family, and the European People's Party - its centre-right counterpart, they are still very loose and split along national lines, with very different platforms. Libertas will be the first genuinely pan-European political party with a common programme.

UKIP grumbles at competition

Britain's eurosceptic party, the UK Independence Party, said there was "absolutely no common ground on Europe between Declan Ganley's new party, Libertas, and UKIP."

UKIP's leader, Nigel Farage, said: "Libertas has nailed its colours firmly to [UK Tory chief] David Cameron's mast of wishing to stay within the European Union and try to reform from inside."

"I think it will come as a surprise to many to learn just how pro EU Mr Ganley is," he added.

Graham Watson, head of the Liberals in the European Parliament, described the new party as "anti-European", but welcomed the challenge coming from Libertas and said that it ironically may even "galvanise pro-Europeans to defend the EU."

"We are far from condemning this initiative of Declan Ganley. He is doing Europe a favour by stimulating interest and debate about the EU, which may result in a higher turnout at next year's European elections," the Liberal leader said.

[Freeski]

Bummer you have to do it again. But the third time, you get to whack them in the head three times.

[Sub-X]

IMHO I don't think there is going to be a third vote,doesn't fit into the EU's timescale for enslavement unification.They are not going to allow us to vote the wrong way again whether we like it or not.

Us bad naughty Irish thinking for ourselves,how dare we,we will be rewarded with an extra dose of Fluoride and a year of terrible predictions and worlds coming to an end if we don't vote yes 

Same BS,different year.
 

[Freeski]

IMHO I don't think there is going to be a third vote,doesn't fit into the EU's timescale for enslavement unification.They are not going to allow us to vote the wrong way again whether we like it or not.

Us bad naughty Irish thinking for ourselves,how dare we,we will be rewarded with an extra dose of Fluoride and a year of terrible predictions and worlds coming to an end if we don't vote yes 

Same BS,different year.
 

The Irish situation is similar to that of Canada and Quebec's referendums on sovereingty. Totally managed, but the evil doers still haven't won - unless of course their whole plan is to keep us distracted, fighting among ourselves, to keep our attention off of them.

[Sub-X]

Cowen to risk all in second poll on Lisbon
Irish Independent
12 December 2008

TAOISEACH Brian Cowen is ready to move ahead with a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, putting his political reputation on the line both at home and abroad.

Mr Cowen will ring the starting bell for Lisbon II after getting agreement on retaining a European Commissioner and “legal guarantees” on neutrality, abortion and tax.

Final details of the deal have still to be hammered out at an EU leaders’ summit in Brussels today, after British Prime Minister Gordon Brown raised concerns over how these guarantees would impact on his country.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy's plan to get the treaty back on track would mean Ireland agreeing to hold a second referendum, probably in October next year.

Foreign Affairs Minister Micheal Martin confirmed last night that the Government was going to hold a referendum if it got agreement from EU leaders.

“If we are satisfied with guarantees we receive, we will be prepared to put this to the electorate,” he said.

The draft agreement from the French presidency of the EU was generally agreed at the summit.

Mr Cowen told his colleagues the issues about the European Commissioner and the guarantees needed to be resolved, in order to reassure people their concerns were being taken on board.

And he said if this happened, he would pledge to try again to ratify the treaty, meaning a second referendum would have to be held.

“Those assurances need to be robust and able to withstand any domestic challenge and not undermine our credibility. We need a spirit of credibility and solidarity. It is essential to show the Irish people their concerns are taken on board.

“If we agree on this political package, I commit the Irish Government to ratify the Lisbon Treaty,” he said.

Declan Ganley, the businessman who led the successful ‘No’ campaign in June, announced yesterday that his group Libertas would try to run candidates in next year’s European elections in every EU country.

Mr Ganley said: “The Irish Government and the powerful elite in Brussels are showing utter contempt for the democratic decision of the Irish people in rejecting the Lisbon Treaty. They tried this with the French, they tried with the Dutch, they are trying it with the Irish. It is time to put a stop to this bullying.”

Mr Sarkozy said the treaty had to come into force by the end of 2009. But he also confirmed there would not be reratification for countries that have already ratified the treaty.

“The European Council takes cognisance of the assurance from Ireland of the steps to ensure ratification, but we need to give Brian (Cowen) the elements to win a new referendum,” he said.

Assurances

European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso rowed in behind the deal, saying that it was possible for Ireland to be given legally binding assurances over voter concerns. “In terms of legislation, matters regarding, for instance, abortion – these are national matters,” he said.

The British are worried that the legal guarantees may result in the reopening of the debate on Lisbon in their parliament and Eurosceptics taking advantage of concessions to Ireland.

The language of the legal guarantees is clear in relation to what it does for Ireland, but it is not clear what its impact may be for other countries, the British argue. Negotiations were ongoing last night among legal advisers to the respective governments.

Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny said a referendum was the only way to ratify the Lisbon Treaty and his party had made this point all along.

But he said he did not think the referendum could be run before the European elections.

[Sub-X]

Irish Public To Vote Twice On Identical Lisbon While Others Have Not Voted Once
http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/1212/eulisbon.html
12 December 2008

“EU leaders have agreed on assurances to pave the way for a second Lisbon referendum in Ireland by November next year.”‘the Irish government is committed to seeking ratification of the Lisbon Treaty by the end of the term of the current commission,’ their draft statement said.

The National Platform EU Research and Information Centre
by Anthony Coughlan - Secretary

Taoiseach Brian Cowen’s hypocrisy in pretending to  “respect” the people’s referendum vote on Lisbon is now evident, for not a jot or tittle of Lisbon will be altered when he forces the people to  vote  on it a second time next year.

Political Declarations or promises regarding future Treaties that are not yet even drafted will not alter a comma of the Lisbon Treaty.

If people vote Yes in Lisbon Two to exactly the same Treaty which they voted No to last June  they will be changing the Irish Constitution so as to recognise the supremacy of the law of the new Union which Lisbon would establish over anything contrary, whether in the Irish Constitution or in political Declarations and promises that might be tacked on to Lisbon.

No political Declarations or promises about commitments and even Protocols in future EU Treaties can change Lisbon or the supremacy of the EU Court of Justice in interpreting that Treaty’s provisions. These  will have come into force well before any further EU Treaty or Treaties will even be negotiated.

If the Irish media and public opinion allow themselves to be taken in by the kind of  presentational trickery Taoiseach Cowen and his Government are now planning,  they could be making themselves the laughing stock of Europe.

A promise by the 27 EU Governments that each Member State can keep a Commissioner permanently under Lisbon is valueless in the light of that Treaty’s provision that from 2014 Member States will lose their right to decide who their national commissioner will be.

For under Lisbon (Article 17.7, amended Treaty on European Union ) a  Government’s present  right to decide would be replaced by a right to make “suggestions” only,  for the incoming  Commission President to decide (See notes below elaborating on this point).

Under the present Nice Treaty arrangements Member States would retain permanently their right to decide who their national Commissioner is - a right which they would lose under Lisbon.

The Nice Treaty requires that the number of Commissioners should be fewer than the number of Member States from 2009, but by an unspecified number to be agreed unanimously.

This requirement of the present Nice-based Treaties can be abided by, and Ireland and the other States can keep a national Commissioner permanently,  by the simple expedient of reducing the number of Commissioners from 27 to 26  and permitting whoever holds the job of   “High Representative for EU Foreign  and Security Policy” - currently Spain’s Javier Solana -  to attend Commission meetings instead of being formally titled a Commissioner from that State.

This can and should be done under the Nice Treaty. This would mean that the  Commission arrangements would continue virtually unchanged from the present. Ireland would retain a Commissioner permanently except in the unlikely event of an Irish person being given the even more important job of High Representative.

Taoiseach Cowen and his Government have deliberately sought to isolate and put pressure on their own people by failing to say after the Lisbon referendum last June that Ireland would not ratify Lisbon in view of the people’s No vote.

If the Taoiseach had done that, continued ratification by the other EU States would have been pointless, for Lisbon requires ratification by all  27 States before it can come into force for anyone.

Such a stand would have led to the Lisbon Treaty being opened and  a chance created for a more democratic rather than less democratic EU through a better Treaty.

The prudent stand now for the Government and for the EU is to  wait for the UK general election and the likely advent to office in Britain of a Conservative Government which will be committed to holding a referendum on Lisbon in the UK and recommending a No vote to it, as long as we Irish do not alter our No vote before then.

That would put paid to the attempted isolation of Ireland, which its own Government has connived at.

It would also give our fellow countrymen and women in Northern Ireland a chance to vote on this Treaty-cum-Constitution which would make them real citizens for the first time of an EU that would have the constitutional  form of a supranational Federal State run on most undemocratic lines under Franco-German hegemony.

(Signed)

Anthony Coughlan Secretary

_______

A NOTE ON HOW LISBON WOULD TAKE AWAY IRELAND’S RIGHT TO DECIDE WHO ITS NATIONAL COMMISSIONER WOULD BE: 

Under the current Nice Treaty arrangements (Treaty Establishing the European Community, Article 214.2) Member States have the right to “propose” a Commissioner every five years. This is effectively  a right to decide, because while the others can ask the Member State in question to give them some other proposal if they do not like the person proposed, if that Member State declines to change its mind, its proposal will prevail, for otherwise it can refuse to accept the proposals of the others.

Article 214.2 TEC  reads: “The Council, acting hy a qualified majority and by common accord with the nominee for the President shall adopt the list of other persons whom it intends to appoint as Members of the Commission, drawn up in accordance with the proposals made by each Member  State.”

Under Lisbon (amended Treaty on European Union ,  Article 17.7)  Commissioners would be appointed on the basis of “suggestions ” from the Member States. The word “proposals ” is thus replaced in Lisbon by “suggestions”.

Effectively  under Lisbon, if it should come into force, it will be the  incoming President of the Commission, interacting with the Member States, who will decide what “suggestions” are acceptable to him or not.

The President of the Commission will be effectively decided first by a special qualified majority vote of the  Prime Ministers and Presidents - 20 out of 27  -  taking account of who has the majority in the EU Parliament. They will propose their nominee to the European Parliament, who will then “elect” him or her. If the European Parliament does not elect the person nominated as President,  the Prime Ministers and Presidents  must propose another candidate within a month.

Then when it comes to the individual Commissioners, Lisbon states (Article 17.7 amended TEU) :

“The Council, by common accord with the president-elect , shall adopt the list of the other persons whom it proposes for appointment as members of the Commission.  They shall be selected, on the basis of suggestions made by Member States, in accordance with the criteria set out in paragraph 3 … ”

Paragraph 3 refers to the criteria of “their general competence and European commitment”.

The Commission President,  the  High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy and the other members of the Commission shall then “be subject as a body to a vote of consent by the European Parliament”. If this consent is given “the Commission as a whole shall be appointed by the European Council, acting by a qualified majority”

In power-political terms  the Big States in the EU can look with equanimity on the proposal that they should  lose their national Commissioner  for 10 years out of every 15 in the rotating system proposed by Lisbon, because they know that they will  have the decisive say in appointing the new Commission President, who in turn will have the key role in deciding who  ALL the Commissioners will be,   based on mere “suggestions” rather than proposals from the Member States.

It is unlikely that  that the incoming Commission President will adopt “suggestions” that are uncongenial or unacceptable to the Big States who will have been crucial in his or her own appointment.

Lisbon would thus endow the incoming Commission President with powers very similar to those of a Prime Minister at national level - the right to decide what “suggestions” from Member States are acceptable to him,  so giving him the right to decide his “Commissioners/Ministers”, the right to allocate whatever jobs he likes to the Commissioners and the right to obtain their resignation and replacement at any time.

________

A NOTE ON THE BIG STATE POWER-GRAB FOR CONTROL OF A POST-LISBON  EUROPEAN UNION

This is shown by tghere specific proposals of the Lisbon Treaty:

a) Appointing the new permanent EU President as a plum job  by agreement of the Prime Ministers and Presidents among themselves, without any democratic input  from the EU’s peoples. The new President would replace the present rotating  six-month EU presidencies and would chair the summit meetings of Prime Ministers and Presidents for a period of 2.5 years, renewable once.

b) Basing EU law-making post-Lisbon  on population size instead of the present system of weighted votes. This would double Germany’s relative voting weight in making EU laws from the present 8% to 17%, increase France’s,  Britain’s and Italy’s from their present 8% each to 12% each, and halve Ireland’s from 2% to 0.8%.

Lisbon would therefore allow 15 EU States to outvote 12 in making European laws, so long as as the 15 constitute 65% of the total EU  population of 500 million or so. France and Germany between them already have one-third of the EU’s population.

c)    (i) Removing the right of Member States to decide their own Commissioner and  effectively giving  that function to the incoming Commission President,  who will be a creature of the Big States.

(ii) Reducing the number of Commissioners by one-third from 2014 - a proposal that can be abandoned by unanimous agreement under Lisbon.

[Sub-X]

Ireland set for second Lisbon referendum
http://euobserver.com/9/27289
12 December 2008

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS – Ireland looks set to hold a second referendum on the EU's Lisbon Treaty next year, having almost secured a series of concessions by the other EU states on its key demands.

A document EU leaders are expected to agree on Friday (12 December) reads: "The Irish government is committed to seeking ratification of the Lisbon Treaty by the end of the term of the current [European] Commission," in November 2009.

In exchange, EU leaders will agree that each member country will keep one commissioner in the next European Commission if the Lisbon Treaty enters into force.

In its current form, the Lisbon Treaty foresees a reduction of the commission whereby as of 2014 just two-thirds of the member states would have a commissioner at any one time. The reduction can be changed by the EU countries however, if they agree to such a move unanimously.

Dublin has said that according to their research into why their citizens voted No, keeping their commissioner had been a key concern, together with holding on to its traditional neutrality. Ireland has also sought assurances that the EU would not impose rules concerning taxation or "ethical issues", such as abortion, euthanasia and gay marriages.

Ireland has secured concessions on these points as well.

"The European Council [EU member states] has carefully noted the other concerns of the Irish people presented by the Taoiseach as set out in the statement annexed relating to taxation policy, family, social and ethical issues, and Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) with regard to Ireland's traditional policy of neutrality," reads the document.

"The European Council agrees that these concerns shall be addressed to the mutual satisfaction of Ireland and the other member states by way of the necessary legal guarantees," it continues.

The UK in particular has expressed some reserves to the declaration, however, insisting that it should be clear guarantees given to Ireland would not change the Lisbon Treaty in any way.

But speaking to journalists on Thursday night (11 December), Irish foreign minister Micheal Martin remained optimistic that all remaining issues would be solved by Friday.

"We are hopeful to get an agreement [on the document] tomorrow," he said.

At this stage, Dublin will obtain only "a declaration of principle" from the EU member states on its key demands, with the proper "legal guarantees" coming later on.

"We will be working on the nature of these legal guarantees" in the coming months, Mr Martin said.

He added that if Dublin obtained the guarantees, "We will be prepared to put this to the electorate," meaning a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

The Irish first rejected the text on 12 June by a vote of 53.4 to 46.6 percent.

An Irish Times poll last month showed that given such assurances, voters would approve the treaty in a second referendum, however, with 43 percent of respondents saying they would now vote Yes, 39 percent No and 18 percent having no opinion.

[Sub-X]

Do you think Ireland will pass another referendum on the Lisbon treaty?
http://www.irishtimes.com/polls/index.cfm?fuseaction=yesnopoll&pollid=8639&answer=0
12 December 2008

58% YES

42% NO

The Irish Times Poll is a forum for people who wish to express their views on issues of topical interest. In order to represent as wide a range of opinions as possible and provide a stimulating platform for discussion, we ask all our contributors to only post comments which are relevant to the daily question.


Your Reaction

    * AFFIRMATIVE. WHATEVER GOVERNMENT WANTS, GOVERNMENT GETS....AND DAMN THE VOTER'S INTERESTS! It's a sad fact folks. The general public will have the Lisbon Treaty, aka E.U. Constitution rammed down their collective throats. And thanks to a culture of patronage, Cute Hoorism and an addiction to instant gratification Mr Biffo and band will have their way once again. Just remember Mr Cowen's words utter not too many months ago: "The Irish public have spoken and the matter is closed. Another referendum will NOT be brought forward by government". How soon ye forget. Don't forget peanut gallery. As the Aggravator has so many times opined: The Irish have met the enemy and it is themselves. HOO RAH!
      eddie- the Aggravator  Ireland

    * Will pigs who fly be called fowl , yes the Irish have always needed that maternal security. Just show them a few bucks and watch em water dance. Sad really, yeah 98% this time they need to be wanted.
      Hoarace Greeley  United States

    * yr crash test dummy logo portrayed as vw yet ford utilise same dummy in cheap mags down here incidentially. I think you better for own good,pass it but maybe ye will not!!. y'all love new wsj (pangalos with dg villars) w/w-WSJ h/l "student anger surges across europe". tku
      maria -syd men at wk  Australia

    * We're like stubborn children. We'll runa round, stampin our feet, shouting No no no no no no. And Declan Ganley will be looking on in delight
      Andrew  Singapore

    * No "effective political leadership requires bold salesmanship ." Maybe if they tickled funny bones with a campaign boast , "Voting YES will cause your wife to have bigger breasts and increase your chances of owning a BMW ." Of course then the majority NO side could counter that with ,"I can offer you only a subsidized chest enlargement and a bicycle .Now who made the most honest offer and who would pass that up :-)
      paorach  Canada

    * They will this time. The fear of God will be put into the Irish people threatening Hell and Damnation, 100% unemployment and the return of the Queen as Head of State if we dare to vote NO again.Now some of that may be an exaggeration but it won't be too far off the mark. But the important point to remember is, the treaty will not have been changed one iota.
      Monty, M50  Ireland

    * Yes!Both the E.U & the mainstream Irish political parties richly deserved their black eyes on the first go-round;however,enough of the contra voters will switch sides,now that the Lisbon Treaty {Uimhir a dho}will get the in-depth debate so sadly lacking 6 months ago.BTW>>>> why the digouts for bankers & pig-farmers when the vaccination programme for young females was deemed to be too expensive? Then we find out that Canada & Ireland rank dead-last in terms of provision of childcare services-- among the relatively affluent countries.Q.E.D.
      cosmick  Canada

    * Probably not. What I've seen so far on the "guarantees" secured by the Government from its cronies on the Council all looks like smoke and mirrors. Unless something more substantial emerges, opponents should have little difficulty in exposing it as a sham.
      Amergin  Niue

    * what has happened to my country? anti-eu, recalling animal meat, support for English football teams, English as the main language...well there you have it, why did we ever leave the UK?
      Lee  Ireland

    * "To be or not to be," my drug server tells me every thing can be had in this world for a price. My mammy is still confused of a Lisbon if necessary , but not necessarily a Lisbon .Must get ready for my step dance lessons ,my teacher we wont walk on water but we can dance our way to heaven, my teacher is never wrong , mammy says .
      Conlin  Ireland

[Sub-X]

Second Irish referendum linked to Croatian EU accession
http://euobserver.com/9/27295
12 December 2008

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS – Legal guarantees promised to Ireland and paving the way for a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty in the country are to be written into a protocol together with Croatia's accession treaty to the EU in 2010 or 2011, current EU President Nicolas Sarkozy said on Friday (12 December).

EU leaders in Brussels this week (11-12 December) agreed to a series of concessions to allow Dublin to make possible a second vote on the bloc's Lisbon Treaty some time in the course of next year.

These include a guarantee that each member state will keep a commissioner in future European Commissions – despite the document initially foreseeing a reduction of the size of the institution, as well as a promise that the EU would not impose rules on Ireland concerning taxation, "ethical issues" – such as abortion, euthanasia and gay marriages - or interfere with its traditional neutrality.

All these issues were highlighted by Dublin as the main concerns of Irish citizens when they first rejected the Lisbon Treaty in June this year.

In order to make these promises legally binding, they will be written into a protocol in Croatia's accession treaty.

"To give a legal value to the engagements made to Ireland by the 26 other member states, we have committed that at the time of the next EU enlargement – whether that will be in 2010 or in 2011, when probably Croatia will join us ... we will use that to add a protocol [on Ireland] to Croatia's accession treaty," Mr Sarkozy told journalists after the EU summit.

Croatia has held EU candidate status since 2004 and opened EU accession talks in 2005. Last month, the European Commission said it could conclude accession negotiations with the bloc by the end of next year, if it fulfills the remaining conditions.

But the French leader's statement represents the clearest indication so far that the Balkan country could effectively become the bloc's 28th member state by 2011 at the latest.

Second referendum in Ireland next year

In exchange for receiving concessions from the other EU countries, Ireland has committed to holding a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty by November 2009.

"The Irish government is committed to seeking ratification of the Lisbon Treaty by the end of the term of the current [European] Commission," in November 2009, reads the document agreed by the 27 EU leaders.

Irish Taoisheach Brian Cowen later confirmed that if Ireland's requirements are met, its citizens will vote again on the document.

"On the basis of the agreement today, and on condition of our being able to satisfactory put guarantees in place ... I would be prepared to return to the public to put to them a new package and to seek their approval of it," he told journalists.

"I am convinced that we are on the right path," he added. "The views of the Irish people are being respected."

He said he was "particularly pleased" that the requirement of keeping a commissioner for Ireland had been met.

"This was very hard fought, and ... it is a major achievement by Ireland. Several member states were strongly opposed," the Taoiseach said.

He did stress however that there was still "a lot of detailed work to be carried out in the months ahead" in order to clarify how exactly Ireland would get all its guarantees, but added that he was hopeful the Irish citizens would eventually be satisfied with the outcome of the negotiations and back the Lisbon Treaty.

[Godfather77]

What part of Ireland's 'no' does the EU not understand?
Saturday 13 December 2008
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/dec/13/eu-ireland-lisbon-treaty

Asking the Irish to vote again on the Lisbon treaty is arrogant, insulting and undemocratic.

Imagine if, following the election of Barack Obama by 52.9% of American voters, the Republican party, which got just 45.7% of votes, demanded another election. Imagine if the Republicans described Obama's victory as a "triumph of ignorance" – brought about by an "unspeakable" and "ignorant" mass of people who should have been "swatted away by the forces of the establishment" – and insisted on holding a second election so that, this time, the voters could "get it right".

There would be uproar, outrage, widespread disgust at such elite disdain for the democratic process. Well, now you know how the Irish people must feel. In June this year, 53.4% of Irish voters rejected the Lisbon treaty, against 46.6% who supported it (giving the "No" camp a "sweeping victory" similar to Obama's). Yet now the Irish will be asked to vote again. EU officials' behind-doors deal to force a second referendum in Ireland reveals their utter contempt for Irish voters, and for democracy itself. It is an historic sucker punch against the sovereignty of the people.

As soon as the Irish people's ballots were counted in June, their rejection of Lisbon was treated as the "wrong" answer, as if they had been taking part in a multiple-choice maths exam and had failed to work out that 2+2=4. Now, they will be given a chance to sit the exam again, "until [they] come up with the right answer," says George Galloway, attacking EU elitism. The notion that the Irish "got it wrong" exposes gobsmacking ignorance about democracy in the upper echelons of the EU. The very fact that a majority of Irish people said no to Lisbon made it the "right answer", true and sovereign and final. "No" really does mean no.

The Irish were subjected to a tirade of slanderous abuse when they dared to reject officials' carefully crafted and profound (in truth, overlong and turgid) document on the future of the EU. One Brussels official described them as "ungrateful bastards", on the basis that Ireland has received lots of handouts from the EU and thus should be more obedient to its paymaster. 

Pro-EU commentators blamed "populist demagogues" for cajoling the Irish into voting no, and said the EU's plans should not be "derailed by lies and disinformation".

It was widely claimed that the Irish simply didn't understand the treaty, and may have been confused by its "technocratic, near incomprehensible language" (well, they are ignorant Paddies, after all). Some claimed that the Irish mistakenly, possibly even illegitimately, had used the referendum to register disgruntlement with their own ruling parties. Margot Wallström, vice-president of the European Commission, said officials should try to "work out what the Irish people had really been voting against". I would have thought that was obvious: they were handed the Lisbon treaty; they said no to it.

We've been here before. When French and Dutch voters rejected the European constitution in 2005 (and according to Valery Giscard d'Estaing, the current Lisbon treaty is the "same as the constitution"), they were sneeringly insulted by their betters in Brussels. Neil Kinnock said it was a "triumph of ignorance". Andrew Duff, Liberal Democrat MEP, labelled the "rejectionists" as an "odd bunch of racists, xenophobes, nationalists, communists, the disappointed centre left and the generally pissed off". He asked whether it is wise to "submit the EU Constitution to a lottery of uncoordinated national plebiscites".

Clearly not, since the plebs might just reject it. The EU's attempts to force the constitution/Lisbon treaty through despite its democratic rejection, and now their offer of a few addendums to the Irish people, make it come across as a corrupt, archaic oligarchy, ensconced in its palaces, looking down at the people of Europe as a strange, dumb, untrustworthy blob.

All of the Irish people I know remain passionate about the idea of Europe. Even those who rejected Lisbon think of Ireland as European, and have travelled, worked and made friends on the continent. It is not Europe that they rejected in the referendum in June, but a document produced by a cut-off and aloof European elite, those cosmopolitan poseurs who are in reality distrustful of Europe's masses, whether it's the thick Irish, the xenophobic French, or the mysterious Turks. The Irish were being properly European; the EU is being merely elitist.

[Sub-X]

Treaty rejected due to a lack of 'understanding'
Irish Independent
15 December 2008

IRISH voters rejected the Lisbon Treaty in part because they did not understand it, a British government minister said yesterday. Europe minister Caroline Flint, suggested misunderstandings were fuelled by the campaign for a 'No' vote in the June referendum.

Voters wrongly believed that the introduction of the treaty would mean an end to Ireland's abortion ban or require its young people to serve in a European Army, said Ms Flint.

Taoiseach Brian Cowen secured legally-binding reassurances at last week's EU summit that the Treaty will not affect Ireland's position on neutrality, tax and abortion policies.

In return for these guarantees, and the promise of a permanent European Commissioner for each country, Mr Cowen is now expected to hold a second referendum in 2009.

Ms Flint suggested that, while Irish voters' concerns were "legitimate", the result in June was determined by misconceptions about the treaty's provisions.

She said: "I visited Dublin about a month ago and met some people who told me directly that people sincerely thought -- partly because of the campaign against the treaty -- that they would have their rights in a number of areas taken away, and that wasn't the case and isn't the case.

[Sub-X]

The Irish government has betrayed its people
http://euobserver.com/9/27282
11 December 2008

EUOBSERVER / COMMENT - The French president yesterday told the group leaders of the European parliament that he has made a deal with the Irish government to hold a second referendum in Ireland to ratify the Lisbon treaty first rejected on 12 June by 53 percent of Irish voters.

None of the representatives of the Irish people who voted No to the Lisbon Treaty were consulted by the Irish government before they struck a deal with the French Presidency. The Irish government has simply ignored the result of the referendum and betrayed those people who voted No in the majority.

Government ministers, including the prime minister, have been urging other countries to "isolate" Ireland by ratifying the treaties so the Irish could sweat it out and then change their mind.

And what do they deliver as concessions to the Irish voters? Not one single word to be changed in the treaty that was also rejected by the French and Dutch voters in referendums in 2005 when it went under the name of "Constitution".

Not one word or legal obligation will be changed. The same content will simply be put in a new envelope, just as Valery Giscard d'Estaing said about the change from the Constitution to the Lisbon Treaty. But this time, not even the headline or the wording will be changed.

It is the same text that was rejected.

It is legally doubtful if it is possible to repeat a binding referendum on the same text in the same parliamentary period.

In the new envelope, there will be a lot of nice words in declarations. They have not the slightest legal value. They will neither change anything in the treaties nor hinder the court in Luxembourg from decide directly against whatever the declarations say.

Then, they will have the promise of a commissioner from each member state. Fine. But the Irish commissioner will be picked by a majority of prime ministers and presidents in the EU. The Irish government can come up with "suggestions", but other member states decide.

It would indeed be a concession if they were change the treaty and allow every member state to elect its own commissioner, and it would be democratic progress if we could elect our commissioner in direct elections together with the elections to the European Parliament.

The Irish government has simply given in and will not even insist on the right of Ireland to nominate its own commissioner.

Declan Ganley is president of Libertas and Jens-Peter Bonde is president of the EU Democrats and member of the European Parliament from 1979-2008

[Sub-X]

Sarkozy hails 'courage' of staging second vote on Lisbon
Irish Independent
17 December 2008

French President Nicolas Sarkozy has praised the "courage" of the Irish Government in staging another referendum on the Lisbon Treaty next year.

He also pledged that the legal guarantees provided to Taoiseach Brian Cowen as part of the deal on holding a second referendum would be included in the new EU treaty to allow Croatia to join the EU in 2010. In one of the final acts of the six-month French presidency, Mr Sarkozy told the European Parliament the guarantees would be "no problem".

"So at the first enlargement after all this, we will make these adjustments, and the Irish Government has courageously promised to hold a new referendum of the people before the end of 2009," he said.

Mr Sarkozy made the implementation of the Lisbon Treaty a priority of the French presidency of the EU and personally visited Taoiseach Brian Cowen in Dublin last July in the wake of the 'No' vote. Both leaders have been in continuous contact, with Mr Cowen also paying visits to Mr Sarkozy in Paris.

"And if things happen as I want them to happen, the Lisbon Treaty will become a reality only one year late," said Mr Sarkozy.

However, he made it clear that the Lisbon Treaty could not be implemented unless there was a 'Yes' vote by the Irish electorate in a second referendum. The main groups on the 'No' side, such as Sinn Fein and Libertas, are already gearing up for another campaign against the treaty.

Problems

Mr Sarkozy said it had been essential to address the problems of the one member state which had not ratified the Treaty.

"When I suggested that we should consult our Irish friends again, people said I was not being respectful of the Irish, by asking them to vote again,'' he said.

"But today, 25 countries have almost concluded the ratification process of the Lisbon Treaty, and in the 26th, the Czech Republic, the constitutional court has just indicated that ratification can go ahead."

Mr Sarkozy said the changes needed to address the Irish 'No' vote included the guarantees that there would still be one commissioner per member state under the Lisbon Treaty. This was despite the views of some countries who believed that a smaller EU Commission was needed to be effective.

"But we can only have the Lisbon Treaty if our Irish friends vote 'Yes' and for that to happen, something new has to appear, and that is one commissioner per country," he said.

Mr Sarkozy had to coordinate Europe's response to the financial crisis, and mediate on Europe's behalf in the conflict between Russia and Georgia during his term of EU office. He said yesterday that he thoroughly enjoyed his six months in charge of EU affairs.

"Europe is not the enemy of nations and nations are not the enemy of Europe'' he said.

[Sub-X]

FG urges end to neutrality despite Lisbon vote
Irish Independent
27 December 2008

Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny still wants to abandon Ireland's traditional neutrality, despite it being a major issue of concern in the Lisbon Treaty referendum.

Mr Kenny said his party's view on neutrality has not changed at all since he called for a change in the country's military policy position shortly after he became leader.

But he says this has nothing to do with the Lisbon debate, as the new legal guarantee with the treaty shows it will not affect Ireland's neutrality.

"Our position on neutrality has not changed at all, but it is not relevant to this debate," he said in an interview with the Irish Independent.

Fine Gael's official policy is for the country to move away from its traditional stance on military neutrality and become a member of EU common defence arrangement.

Effectively, the EU is now running peacekeeping operations, sub-contracted by the UN.

Mr Kenny said he stood by his stance on neutrality.

"Neutrality is not relevant to this debate on Lisbon because there is a protocol in there from Maastricht, and that will be doubly binding when this one comes through, this declaration here.

"I went to Kosovo and saw the troops there myself and they want to be there because they are soldiers and they want to participate in these things," he said.

The EU began its first military operation of keeping the peace in Macedonia five years ago, but Irish troops did not take part because it had UN approval -- not authorisation.

Currently, Irish troops are serving in EU-led peacekeeping forces in Chad and Kosovo and both of these operations are authorised by the UN.

Fine Gael claims there are problems with the rigidity of Ireland's defence policy which may reappear elsewhere.

Mr Kenny said he does not feel his party's stance on neutrality will add to the confusion over the Lisbon Treaty when the second referendum is held.

"No, I am not concerned about that and I have no problem at all talking about our party's position on neutrality, none at all. Absolutely not," he said.

[oshea.declan]

Speech of the President of the Czech Republic Václav Klaus in the European Parliament

Desmond Langdon
www.info-wars.org
25 Feb 2009

The following is a speech made by Václav Klaus during a plenary session of the European Parliament.
Václav makes it clear that the Czech Republic did not accede to the E.U. with unrealistic or false expectations, but he draws a parallel with the present organization of the European Parliament and the centralized, federalist system of the former Soviet Union. He makes it clear that a dogma exists within the E.U. bureaucracy, where members of the E.U. parliament are in a “group-think” mode, and are intolerant of anyone who proposes reasonable debate as to the future of Europe which does not tally with the concept of “Integration” as dictated by the E.U. elite.
He also criticizes members of the European parliament for being out of touch with the real issues in their respective member states, and making decisions in Brussels which should really be made in the member states and closer to the citizens of each state. He highlights accurately that the E.U. parliament is comprised of “professional politicians” and their minions, who have little regard for the interests of the ordinary citizen. Václav outlines the dangers of this “group-think” by E.U. politicians towards integration and their intolerance of any sensible alternatives proposed.
Václav was jeered by E.U. parliamentarians during and after his speech, which goes to prove the old adage; “the truth hurts..”.




Mr. Chairman, Members of European Parliament,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

First of all, I would like to thank you for the possibility to speak here, in the European Parliament, in one of the key institutions of the European Union. I have been here several times but never before had an opportunity to speak at a plenary session. Therefore I do appreciate your invitation. The elected representatives of 27 countries with a broad spectrum of political opinions and views make a unique auditorium, as unique and in essence as revolutionary as the experiment of the European Union itself. For more than half a century, the EU has attempted to make decision-making in Europe better by moving a significant part of decisions from the individual states to the European institutions.

I’ve come here from the capital of the Czech Republic, from Prague, from the historic centre of the Czech statehood, from one of the important places where European thinking, European culture and European civilisation has emerged and developed. I come as a representative of the Czech state, which has always, in all its various forms, been part of the European history, of a state, that has many times taken a direct and important part in shaping this history, and which wants to continue shaping it also today.

Nine years have passed since the president of the Czech Republic last spoke to you. That was my predecessor, Václav Havel, and it was four years before our accession to the European Union. Several weeks ago, the Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolánek, also held a speech here, as a leader of a country presiding over the EU Council. His speech focused on topics, based on the priorities of the Czech presidency, as well as on the topical problems the EU countries are facing now.

This allows me to focus on issues that are more general, and – at first sight – perhaps less dramatic than solving the current economic crisis, the Ukrainian-Russian gas conflict, or the Gaza situation. I do believe, however, these issues are of extraordinary importance for the further development of the European integration project.

In less than three months, the Czech Republic will commemorate the fifth anniversary of its EU accession. We will commemorate it with dignity. We will commemorate it as a country, which – unlike some other new member countries – does not feel disappointed over unfulfilled expectations connected with our membership. This is no surprise to me and there is a rational explanation for it. Our expectations were realistic. We knew well that we were entering a community formed and shaped by human beings. We knew it was not a utopian construction, put together without authentic human interests, visions, views and ideas. These interests as well as ideas can be found all over the EU and it cannot be otherwise.

We interpreted our EU accession on one hand as a confirmation of the fact that we had managed, quite rapidly, over less than fifteen years since the fall of communism, to become a standard European country again. On the other hand, we considered (and we still do) the opportunity to actively take part in the European integration process as a chance to take advantage of the already highly integrated Europe and – at the same time – to influence this process according to our views. We feel our share of responsibility for the development of the European Union and with this feeling of responsibility we approach our presidency of the EU Council. I believe that the first six weeks of the Czech presidency have convincingly demonstrated our responsible attitude.

At this forum, I would like to repeat once again clearly and loudly – for those of you who don’t know it or do not want to know – my conviction, that for us there was and there is no alternative to the European Union membership and that in our country there is no relevant political force that could or would want to undermine this position. We have been therefore really touched by the repeated and growing attacks we have been facing; attacks based on the unfounded assumption that the Czechs are searching for some other integration project than the one they became members of five years ago. This is not true.

The citizens of the Czech Republic feel that the European integration has an important and needed mission and task. It can be summarized in the following way:

- removing unnecessary – and for human freedom and prosperity counterproductive – barriers to the free movement of people, goods, services, ideas, political philosophies, world views, cultural patterns and behaviour models that have been for various reasons over the centuries formed among the individual European states;

- a joint care of the public goods, existing on the continental level, meaning projects that cannot be effectively carried out through bilateral negotiations of two (or more) neighbouring European countries.

The efforts to realise these two objectives – removing barriers and rationally selecting issues that should be solved at the continental level – are not and will never be completed. Various barriers and obstacles still remain and the decision-making at the Brussels level is certainly more numerous than would be optimal. Certainly there are more numerous than the people in the individual member states ask for. You, Members of the European Parliament, are certainly well aware of this. The question I want to ask you is therefore a purely theoretical one: are you really convinced that every time you take a vote, you are deciding something that must be decided here in this hall and not closer to the citizens, i.e. inside the individual European states?

In the politically correct rhetoric we keep hearing these days, we often hear about other possible effects of European integration, which are, however, of lesser and secondary importance. These are, moreover, driven by the ambitions of professional politicians and the people connected to them, not by the interests of ordinary citizens of the member states.

When I said, that the European Union membership did not have and does not have any alternative; I only mentioned half of what must be said. The other – logical – half of my statement is that the methods and forms of European integration do, on the contrary, have quite a number of possible and legitimate variants, just as they proved to have in the last half century. There is no end of history. Claiming that the status quo, the present institutional form of the EU, is a forever uncriticizable dogma, is a mistake that has been – unfortunately – rapidly spreading, even though it is in direct contradiction not only with rational thinking, but also with the whole two-thousand-year history of European civilization. The same mistake applies to the a priori postulated, and therefore equally uncriticizable, assumption that there is only one possible and correct future of the European integration, which is the “ever-closer Union”, i.e. advancement towards deeper and deeper political integration of the member countries.

Neither the present status quo, nor the assumption that the permanent deepening of the integration is a blessing, is – or should be – a dogma for any European democrat. The enforcement of these notions by those, who consider themselves – to use the phrase of the famous Czech writer Milan Kundera – “the owners of the keys” to European integration, is unacceptable.

Moreover, it is self evident, that one or another institutional arrangement of the European Union is not an objective in itself; but a tool for achieving the real objectives. These are nothing but human freedom and such economic system that would bring prosperity. That system is a market economy.

This would certainly be the wish of the citizens of all member countries. Yet, over the twenty years since the fall of communism, I have been repeatedly witnessing that the feelings and fears are stronger among those who spent a great part of the 20th century without freedom and struggled under a dysfunctional centrally planned and state-administered economy. It is no surprise that these people are more sensitive and responsive to any phenomena and tendencies leading in other directions than towards freedom and prosperity. The citizens of the Czech Republic are among those I’m talking about.

The present decision making system of the European Union is different from a classic parliamentary democracy, tested and proven by history. In a normal parliamentary system, part of the MPs support the government and part support the opposition. In the European parliament, this arrangement has been missing. Here, only one single alternative is being promoted and those who dare thinking about a different option are labelled as enemies of the European integration. Not so long ago, in our part of Europe we lived in a political system that permitted no alternatives and therefore also no parliamentary opposition. It was through this experience that we learned the bitter lesson that with no opposition, there is no freedom. That is why political alternatives must exist.

And not only that. The relationship between a citizen of one or another member state and a representative of the Union is not a standard relationship between a voter and a politician, representing him or her. There is also a great distance (not only in a geographical sense) between citizens and Union representatives, which is much greater than it is the case inside the member countries. This distance is often described as the democratic deficit, the loss of democratic accountability, the decision making of the unelected – but selected – ones, as bureaucratisation of decision making etc. The proposals to change the current state of affairs – included in the rejected European Constitution or in the not much different Lisbon Treaty – would make this defect even worse.

Since there is no European demos – and no European nation – this defect cannot be solved by strengthening the role of the European parliament either. This would, on the contrary, make the problem worse and lead to an even greater alienation between the citizens of the European countries and Union institutions. The solution will be neither to add fuel to the “melting pot” of the present type of European integration, nor to suppress the role of member states in the name of a new multicultural and multinational European civil society. These are attempts that have failed every time in the past, because they did not reflect the spontaneous historical development.

I fear that the attempts to speed up and deepen integration and to move decisions about the lives of the citizens of the member countries up to the European level can have effects that will endanger all the positive things achieved in Europe in the last half a century. Let us not underestimate the fears of the citizens of many member countries, who are afraid, that their problems are again decided elsewhere and without them, and that their ability to influence these decisions is very limited. So far, the European Union has been successful, partly thanks to the fact that the vote of each member country had the same weight and thus could not be ignored. Let us not allow a situation where the citizens of member countries would live their lives with a resigned feeling that the EU project is not their own; that it is developing differently than they would wish, that they are only forced to accept it. We would very easily and very soon slip back to the times that we hoped belonged to history.

This is closely connected with the question of prosperity. We must say openly that the present economic system of the EU is a system of a suppressed market, a system of a permanently strengthening centrally controlled economy. Although history has more than clearly proven that this is a dead end, we find ourselves walking the same path once again. This results in a constant rise in both the extent of government masterminding and constraining of spontaneity of the market processes. In recent months, this trend has been further reinforced by incorrect interpretation of the causes of the present economic and financial crisis, as if it was caused by free market, while in reality it is just the contrary – caused by political manipulation of the market. It is again necessary to point out to the historical experience of our part of Europe and to the lessons we learned from it.

Many of you certainly know the name of the French economist Frederic Bastiat and his famous Petition of the Candlemakers, which has become a well-known and canonical reading, illustrating the absurdity of political interventions in the economy. On 14 November 2008 the European Commission approved a real, not a fictitious Bastiat’s Petition of the Candlemakers, and imposed a 66% tariff on candles imported from China. I would have never believed that a 160-year-old essay could become a reality, but it has happened. An inevitable effect of the extensive implementation of such measures in Europe is economic slowdown, if not a complete halt of economic growth. The only solution is liberalisation and deregulation of the European economy.

I say all of this because I do feel a strong responsibility for the democratic and prosperous future of Europe. I have been trying to remind you of the elementary principles upon which European civilisation has been based for centuries or even millennia; principles, the validity of which is not affected by time, principles that are universal and should be therefore followed even in the present European Union. I am convinced that the citizens of individual member countries do want freedom, democracy and economic prosperity.

At this moment in time, the most important task is to make sure that free discussion about these problems is not silenced as an attack on the very idea of European integration. We have always believed that being allowed to discuss such serious issues, being heard, defending everyone’s right to present a different than “the only correct opinion” – no matter how much we may disagree with it – is at the very core of the democracy we were denied for over four decades. We, who went through the involuntary experience that taught us that a free exchange of opinions and ideas is the basic condition for a healthy democracy, do hope, that this condition will be met and respected also in the future. This is the opportunity and the only method for making the European Union more free, more democratic and more prosperous.

Václav Klaus, European Parliament, Brussels,
19 February 2009

[White Rose Sophie]

Glad to see more updates on this.  Good job.   

[oshea.declan]

Last Updated: Thursday, March 19, 2009, 11:55
Recession, Lisbon on agenda for EU meeting

Taoiseach Brian Cowen is meeting other EU leaders at the European Council summit during which it is expected they will discuss the global recession and the Lisbon Treaty..

Mr Cowen, fresh from his visit to Washington for St Patrick’s Day, is accompanied at the Brussels meeting by Minister for Finance Brian Lenihan, Minister for Foreign Affairs Micheal Martin and Minister for European Affairs Dick Roche.

“Discussions at the European Council will focus on the global economic and financial situation, energy and climate change and external relations,” said a Government spokesman.

“On the global economy, the Taoiseach will take the opportunity to report on his discussions with US president Barack Obama this week.

“The Taoiseach will also update his colleagues on the Lisbon Treaty and the development of guarantees for Ireland.”

Mr Cowen is also due to speak at a reception hosted with Microsoft, entitled Investing for the Future.

The Taoiseach is outlining Ireland’s response to the global economic crisis by referencing the Government’s Framework for a Smart Economy, which was published in December.

The blueprint aims at maximising the potential for innovation, enhancing the environment and securing energy supplies.

Other aims of the Framework include investing in critical infrastructure and promoting and efficient and effective public services.

PA http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0319/breaking1.htm

[oshea.declan]

German ambassador defends Lisbon Treaty remarks



MARY FITZGERALD, Foreign Affairs Correspondent

THE GERMAN ambassador to Ireland has defended remarks he made at a cultural event in Tralee, Co Kerry, in which he warned of the consequences of a second rejection of the Lisbon Treaty.

Christian Pauls was reported to have told an audience gathered for the official launch of a partnership between Tralee and the Frankfurt- Höchst Schlossfest that Ireland would “throw away its future” if it voted No in a second referendum on the treaty.

Ireland could not have an a la carte approach to Europe and simply pick and choose what it liked, he said, according to local media reports of the event which took place on Monday.

The ambassador was also said to have noted that rural regions such as Kerry returned a much higher No vote than urban areas in last year’s referendum.

He reportedly made pointed references to those who “complain about other nations fishing in their waters. . . and forget who pays their milk subsidies”.

Informed of the reports yesterday, Mr Pauls told The Irish Times that while he could not recall using “those exact words”, he admitted that he had said “something along those lines” at the event.

“The reports make it sound like I was lecturing Ireland and the Irish but it was not meant to be aggressive or demeaning,” he said.

“A second No would have horrific consequences for Ireland and I am not the first to say it. I don’t think there is anything particularly new in that.”

The ambassador rejected suggestions his remarks could be considered undiplomatic. “They are not. I am simply conveying what my government thinks. That is my job.”

Mr Pauls said that in the run-up to the first referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, foreign diplomats based in Ireland had “stayed quiet” on the issue because they did not want to be seen as interfering in the Irish vote. The ambassador said he no longer considered this necessary.

“We are in a different stage in the ballgame now. . . Everybody seems to be forgetting that this is a family issue involving 27 family members. I find the prospect of a second No frightening and I am going to continue making that case.”

Anti-Lisbon Treaty group Libertas criticised the ambassador’s remarks, describing them as “unacceptable” and “insulting” to Irish voters.

“Ambassador Pauls’s statement is utterly false, and is a disgusting attempt to bully ordinary people down a course that he has chosen for them,” said Libertas founder Declan Ganley. “It is absolutely extraordinary for a foreign diplomat to try to tell the Irish people what way to vote.”

It is not the first time Mr Pauls has provoked controversy. In September 2007, he was reprimanded by the Government for comments he made during an unscripted speech to a group of visiting German industrialists. The ambassador later claimed parts of the speech, which the Department of Foreign Affairs described as “inaccurate, misinformed and inappropriate”, had been mistranslated. He admitted describing Irish history as “sadder than Poland’s” but denied using the word “coarse” to describe Ireland.

This article appears in the print edition of the Irish Times           
 http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2009/0320/1224243126493.html

[oshea.declan]

Brussels ‘recreating Soviet bloc in Europe’

The outspoken Czech leader has warned of a ‘democratic deficit’

THE leader of the Czech Republic, which holds the rotating European Union presidency, has warned that a “Europe of states” is in danger of turning into a “state of Europe”, legislating on almost every aspect of people’s lives but lacking in democracy and transparency.

In an interview with The Sunday Times, President Vaclav Klaus drew parallels between Brussels and the failed communist dictatorships of eastern Europe.

“My criticism is based on the sensitivity towards attempts to restrain freedom and democracy, and it does relate to the fact that for most of my life I lived in a political, social and economic system which was not free and was not democratic,” he said.

Klaus also predicted that Gordon Brown’s attempts to produce a European solution to the global economic crisis in time for next month’s G20 summit in London could make the problems worse.

Klaus, 67, an economist by training and a successful finance minister after the fall of communism, said he believed Brown’s plans for more regulatory supervision of the financial system would resolve nothing. Instead, Europe should let business and markets go free.

“The crisis cannot be solved by restraining human initiative and putting further burdens on businesses,” he said. “I propose the exact opposite: deregulation, liberalisation, removing barriers and unnecessary obstructive legislation at the European level.”

A longstanding Eurosceptic and admirer of Margaret Thatcher, Klaus remains scornful of attempts to impose the Lisbon treaty on an unwilling electorate. He said the treaty contained measures to give unelected officials in Brussels “even more power”.

Irish voters who threw out the treaty in a referendum last year “knew what they were doing”, Klaus added, and he was not certain that the second vote which has been called will have a different outcome: “But the pressure will be enormous and not very democratic.”

He talked of a “democratic deficit” in the EU when he addressed the European parliament last month. In his interview, conducted by e-mail, he explained: “I see the democratic deficit in a growing distance between the citizens of the EU member states and the EU political elite, as well as in the shift of decision making from the member states’ capitals to Brussels.”

About 75% of legislation was made in the EU by unelected officials, he said. The Lisbon treaty would give the EU its own legal personality and would abolish important rights of veto: “This certainly is not a solution to the democratic deficit. It makes the democratic deficit even greater.”

Klaus refused to say whether he would agree to sign the treaty, which has yet to be passed by the Czech Senate, if and when it arrives on his desk.

“I don’t wish to foresee . . . what happens after that; let’s wait for the Senate’s decision,” he said. The Czech government’s presidency has smashed any hopes of a cosy EU consensus. Klaus was booed by many MEPs after his speech and a humorous sculpture installed in Brussels portrayed Bulgaria as a lavatory, Romania as a Dracula theme park and France as a country permanently on strike. They were not amused.

Klaus, who helped to lead his country from communism to freedom, warned that the new constitution would stifle debate and democracy. “Not so long ago, in our part of Europe we lived in a political system that permitted no alternatives and therefore also no parliamentary opposition,” he said.

“It was through this experience that we learnt the bitter lesson that with no opposition and tolerance to differing points of view, there is no freedom.”

Klaus revels in speaking his mind on controversial subjects, always prepared to confront politically correct orthodoxies. He is a leading critic of the green movement and also of measures to fight global warming. Freedom and prosperity, he said, were much more endangered than the climate.

He firmly refuses to fly the blue and gold European flag over his official residence in Prague, pointing out that “the European Union is not a state and legally it does not have a flag”.

In a pointed reference to his country’s Soviet-dominated past, he said: “We have lived through the times when it was compulsory on some days to fly another state flag next to ours. I am very glad that these times are over.”

 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article5950412.ece

[White Rose Sophie]

Thanks for the update.

 

[Sub-X]

With a heavy heart I hate to say it but I think this time around the Yes camp will have their day.The propaganda machine has already begun to churn out the garbage,EU incentives to aid in the economical crisis and the cries of house worse off we would be if we were not a member of the EU.In my view this economic crisis came at just the right time to sway the majority to the glory of being members of the community of a United Europe. 

The most ironic thing is that this is the "only issue" the majority of the house will agree on 
 

[White Rose Sophie]

With a heavy heart I hate to say it but I think this time around the Yes camp will have their day.The propaganda machine has already begun to churn out the garbage,EU incentives to aid in the economical crisis and the cries of house worse off we would be if we were not a member of the EU.In my view this economic crisis came at just the right time to sway the majority to the glory of being members of the community of a United Europe. 

The most ironic thing is that this is the "only issue" the majority of the house will agree on 
 

Sad news indeed.

BUT I'm SO GLAD TO SEE YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!  We've missed you!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Sub-X]

Sad news indeed.

BUT I'm SO GLAD TO SEE YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!  We've missed you!!!!!!!!!!

 

Ah shucks,you are such a little sweetheart 

[White Rose Sophie]

Ah shucks,you are such a little sweetheart 

Seriously, I was worried about you!  Just this morning I had a little discussion with SOMEONE about it.   

Don't be such a stranger!!!   

[Sub-X]

Seriously, I was worried about you!  Just this morning I had a little discussion with SOMEONE about it.   

Don't be such a stranger!!!   

*breaks into song*

"Strangers in the night,exchanging glances,do do do dodo do"(thats all I know).

I bet thats the first time thats ever happened.