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

[mickswann]

Great work, this is proving to be one of the most informative threads on here.

[Sub-X]

Swedish Social Democrats urge Lisbon rejection
http://www.caeuc.org/index.php?q=node/295
by Morgan Johansson and Bo Bernhardsson

To read original article in Swedish


[EXTRACTS]

This ruling by the Court of Justice in the so-called Laval case just before Christmas last year is now the subject of both discussion and investigation. The judgement is complicated, and lawyers bicker about what it really means. That the European Court of Justice rejected … [the] blockade [by trade unions] is clear, but the questions remain: on what basis and what are we going to do about it. There is talk of changes in [various Swedish laws and agreements] …leading to … social dumping.

But no one seems to want to question the true principle of this: when was the European Court of Justice given the mandate to rule over Swedish conflict resolution? When was the European Court of Justice a senior Labour Court? And should it really be?

We have both been active on Europe for over 15 years, in various positions - as journalists, as Secretary of State and Minister of State, as members of Parliament. We worked for Swedish EU membership in 1994, because we believed in the vision of a Europe of the peoples, erasing borders to create a counterbalance to the rapacious capitalism that is taking over the world.

Much has been positive about EU membership. The unhindered travel, trade, and social exchanges across borders. Now the EU will also bring together European states from east to west.

Our belief, of course, still is that Sweden should remain a part of the EU, as an active and constructive member. But we must admit that we and many of us on the Yes side made a big mistake in that we underestimated the European Court of Justice's position within the European system.

The European Court of Justice is not an ordinary court, in our opinion, adjudicating on individual cases. In practice, the Court also [has] an extensive lagprövningsrätt [literally:law-testing right], which means that the court can reject national laws.

This is contrary to the principle of popular sovereignty ... [which] establishes that the power to decide what laws apply in Sweden should lie with elected representatives, not with lawyers. Basically, it’s a question of democracy. Voters can hold their elected representatives accountable for the decisions they make. If they are not satisfied, they can replace them in the next election. But lawyers in a court of law cannot be held accountable by the voters and replaced.

Nevertheless, in the EU context, we have accepted this lagprövningsrätt ... The problem is that the Court has a tendency to continuously extend its mandate, and focus more and more areas under its control.

Almost everything can be inserted under the heading of "common market", then a gradual shift of power sets in - in two ways: first, from the state-level to the EU; then from elected representatives to lawyers. What is happening is thus both a centralization of power, and a judicialization of power. …

…The Laval case is a crystal clear example of an area – industrial dispute resolution - in which the European Court of Justice [intervened] in a way that probably no one in the Socialist 'yes' side had expected. This is not any old issue: it is an essential element of social democratic policies and of the Swedish model. Trade unions’ ability to take industrial action to get a company to accept a collective agreement has now been limited in a way that it was never before. This will open the way in Sweden for low wage competition and social dumping.

This cannot but have consequences for the Socialists’ EU policy. We cannot just go on as before. We must become much more questioning, and carefully examine any proposals from the EU…This approach must also apply to the new EU Treaty.
…only the other day John Monks General Secretary of the European Trade Union Confederation called for a new clause on trade union rights to be added to the Treaty, to deal with, among other things the Laval issue. It must, he argued, be made before the EU Treaty enters into force…It seems to be wishful thinking to believe that the Treaty as it now stands would be sufficient to prevent more Laval type rulings in the European Court of Justice.

…Socialist Party public opinion is growing on this issue. Our worker’s municipality in Lund adopted in January a statement that the Treaty should not be approved unless Laval is resolved. We know that a number of local party organisations will follow in the spring. This is a wise and logical line to pursue.

The social democrat trade union LO should therefore not hesitate. We should make it a condition that we are not going to help to ratify the Treaty in September, unless the Laval issue is resolved. It must first be absolutely clear that trade unions can take strike action to prevent social dumping.

[Sub-X]

Referendum Commission Confirms Sinn Féin Position on Trade Veto
http://www.no2lisbon.ie/en/press-centre/entry/167
June 4, 2008

Speaking after the Referendum Commission Clarification statement today Sinn Féin spokesperson on agriculture Martin Ferris TD said that "The Referendum Commission clarification confirms Sinn Féin's position on loss of veto on international trade agreements."

Deputy Ferris said:

"Sinn Féin has argued that the Lisbon Treaty effectively removes Ireland's ability to veto the kind of international trade deal currently being negotiated by Peter Mandelson.

"At present member states have a general veto if such agreements include aspects of services, such as health, education and social services. There are also vetoes in relation to intellectual property.

"Article 188 and Article 97 of the Lisbon Treaty change these vetoes. They are either removed completely or restricted to such an extent that it is difficult to imagine a set of circumstances in which they could be used.

"Equally issues such as foreign investment and services are in the overwhelming number of cases governed by qualified majority voting under the current rules.

"Sinn Féin has repeatedly sought clarification on this matter from the European Commission, to no avail. Today's statement by the Referendum Commission confirms what Sinn Féin has been saying all along - the veto which currently exists will effectively be gone if the Lisbon Treaty is ratified.

"Assurances from Brian Cowan on the use of Ireland's veto on international trade agreements not in Ireland's interests are simply not worth the paper they are written on. The Irish government cannot commit to using a veto if in fact that veto does not exist.

"I put it to Brian Cowan that the reason the government has spent months hand wringing on this issue and has made his commitment to the IFA at the eleventh hour is because he knows that the treaty text does not support his claim on the veto.

"Sinn Féin stands over its argument that the Lisbon Treaty removes Ireland's ability to veto the kind of international trade agreement currently being negotiated by Peter Mandelson at the WTO. Article 188 removes the general veto on services such as health, education and social services. It is replaced with a restricted veto, which could only be applied if this state could prove that the inclusion of such services risked 'seriously disturbing the national organisation of such services.' Such a restricted and conditional veto could not be used to block the current WTO trade deal."

[Sub-X]

Cóir denounces personal attacks
http://www.lisbonvote.com/
5/6/2008

Cóir has denounced the highly personalised attacks made by the Yes campaign on individuals and spokespersons working for a No vote to the Lisbon Treaty. Spokesman Richard Greene said that the attacks were "indicative of the contempt in which the political parties held the electorate since they had refused to debate the treaty during the entire campaign, preferring to make wild and false allegations against No campaigners instead."

The Cóir spokesman said that the "Yes" campaign had now gone to ridiculous extremes, raising CIA bogeymen and other untrue spectres in an attempt to smear No campaigners.

Mr Greene said that Cóir had been told through a Fianna Fáil source that the personalised attacks would increase in the run up to the vote. "Our politicians cannot sell this treaty, because this is a bad treaty for Ireland and for Europe," he said. "This is what they are reduced to in this campaign - and it's not working for them."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clear as mud: Commission misjudges treaty clarification
http://www.lisbonvote.com/
Irish Examiner
5/6/2008

By Paul O'Brien, Political Correspondent

THE independent body tasked with explaining the Lisbon treaty to voters endured an embarrassing moment yesterday when it was unable to explain a key section of the document.


The Referendum Commission held a press conference to "clarify" five key issues that had arisen during the campaign. In a press release it handed out, the commission explained that Ireland's right to veto EU proposals would be removed in a certain number of areas if the treaty was passed. These included: "Arrangements for the control of implementing powers."

Asked by a journalist what this meant, commission chairman High Court judge Mr Justice Iarfhlaith O'Neill appeared flummoxed. "As your question necessarily points up or implies, it's quite difficult to be precise about what that means. There certainly isn't a precision about it whereby one could say it applies to A, B, C or D."

There then followed a lengthy silence, as journalists waited for the judge to expand further. When he did not, he was asked if he could clarify what areas of power were involved, to which he replied: "No, we'll consider that and we'll return to that later."

The episode detracted from the central aim of the press conference, which was to clarify five key areas of the treaty on which there had been "confusion". These included the effect of the treaty on Ireland's abortion laws.

Mr Justice O'Neill said ratification of the treaty would not affect Ireland's constitutional position on abortion. Some no campaigners claim passing the treaty would allow the European Court of Justice impose abortion on Ireland.

But Mr Justice O'Neill said the treaty contained a protocol stating nothing would affect the application in Ireland of article 40.3.3 of the constitution, which allows for abortion only in cases where there is a threat to the life of the mother.

[Sub-X]

Lisbon Treaty: It’s up to us
http://wearechangeireland.org/

Lisbon Treaty: It’s up to us

Across Europe there is widespread opposition to the treaty from people in the other 26 countries denied a referendum. It’s up to us to speak for them and this is a unique historic moment in which we are privileged to be able to change the course of Europe by honoring those without a voice.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A Cry To Ireland From An American To Reject The Lisbon Treaty
http://wearechangeireland.org/

As an Irishman of the diaspora (all four of my grandparents were of Irish descent) I am vitally interested in the present and, especially, the future of my home land. This issue of the Lisbon Treaty frightens me to death! I’m afraid that too many of my brothers and sisters do not realize that the referendum on the Lisbon Treaty is in effect a decision equal to new elections in Ireland. The decision on ratifying the Lisbon Treaty is - upon transferring the current powers of the nation state of Ireland to the federal state in Brussels – it is a decision on accepting or rejecting the permanent construction of A NEW FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND PARLIAMENT OVER IRELAND. To do so will be to utterly discard on the rubbish heap of history all the sacrifices of our ancestors, both the suffering against British oppression and the fighting for freedom in which so many lives were lost.

This is a crucial time in Irish history - a time when you/we will decide whether to march on under your/our own strength and character and leadership or to surrender your/our rights, lives, and fate to others who have, upon every past opportunity, either turned their backs on Ireland in her need or swooped in to take advantage of her riches. Which is exactly what is happening now. Ireland (God bless her forever!) has risen, by her own strength of character and moral fortitude and by God’s kind grace, far above her past of subjection and base poverty to a point where she is a jewel in the crown of Europe and the world. Ireland has earned all her scars and medals of valour and has come into her own - at last. (One might quote of Ireland as well, “Free at last, free at last! Thank God almighty, we’re free at last!”)

And now, in the time of finally enjoying the fruits of our hard-won, blood-bought freedoms and successes, Ireland considers handing over her self-mastery to yet another foreign dictator! God forbid it! Let Ireland be Ireland, not some small dot on the EU map. Let Ireland be Ireland, not another chattel within another kingdom - for such is the becoming EU/EC. Never forget the sacrifices made by our (OUR) grandparents for the possibility of self-rule for Ireland. We are Ireland! We are not Europeans - we never have been. We were at best pets, at worst slaves of Europeans. Ireland has suffered too long to throw away her freedom and self-sufficiency on yet another European master race. We are Ireland!

Look long and hard at America and learn from her mistakes. Under her own power, the United States stood together by choice. Today, we have given up the idea of mutually beneficial partnership among the member states and have become subjects to a dictatorial Federal Government who seeks to rip our choice from us - from freedom of religion to freedom of choice to freedom of speech. American is becoming what the EU would march straight into, from the beginning.

Ireland, my Ireland, whom I learned to pray for and to love from my mother’s knee and my father’s stories, remember the source of your strength in your tortured past - return to your faith and your moral sense of self. God lead you through 700 years of tribulation and abject slavery. Your/our sense of Irish identity apart from that of the rest of the world kept us unified and alive during years of deprivation and attempted genocide. Please, please, please don’t give all that up now for a new, stronger master.

We, the children of your diaspora, are counting on you to safeguard our heritage and our home. Guard and keep them from another outsider who seeks to steal and destroy our culture. We are counting on you. Please don’t let us down. Remain independent and free and self-governing.

Source: A Cry To Ireland From An American To Reject The Lisbon Treaty

[Sub-X]

Women Say NO to the Lisbon Treaty
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87842
June 05, 2008

The Campaign Against the EU Constitution held a press conference today to address the impact of the proposed Lisbon Treaty on the lives of women in Ireland.

A broad spectrum of campaigners from Health, trade Unions, mental health campaigners, councillors, academics, writers and community activists came together today to offer their vision of Europe and to challenge the neoliberal anti-woman and anti human agenda. Ailbhe Smuyth ably chaired a thorough and concise platform of speakers who addressed many parts of the treaty and how it is being sold to us. Rita Fagan of St Michaels Estate outlined the devastating consequences of privatisation on communities whose housing needs are not being provided for by market led policies. Bríd Smith, on behalf of Unite argued that because of the Laval case workers, in particular women swill not benefit when capital has more rights over people.

Cathleen O Neill a veteran campaigner highlighted the neglect in particular within the health service while Maire O'Connor described the American health companies who have been caught as fraudsters in the States now swooping in on the galloping pace of health privatisation in Ireland. Sinead Kennedy noted how the Women for a yes vote at their press conference yesterday had rewritten womens history in Ireland and the EU claiming that the EU brought about positive change, neglecting the fact that women and men had campaigned and fought vigorously for equality, including many of those at the press conference.

Catherine Connolly described reading the treaty, which costs €42 to buy, a reason in itself to vote no another commented, and how so much of it was vague except for the 20 pages on militarism which used phrases like 'we shall' rather than vague intentions which have no legal meaning when it came to other issues.

Chairing the press conference, Ailbhe Smyth said: “Women should not be bullied into saying Yes to Lisbon because ‘Europe has been good for us’. We are voting on the Lisbon Treaty, not on past benefits of EU membership, and Lisbon places the interests of the market, not people, at the heart of the European project.”
Lisbon would harm the interests of women in Ireland and throughout the EU in the following ways:
* It would accelerate the opening up of essential social services such as health and education to privatisation, with disastrous consequences for the welfare of families, and for women who are at the frontline as both users and workers.

Please go to http://www.caeuc.org/index.php?q=:

Signed

Cllr Joan Collins, Independent Socialist;

Mary Coughlan, singer;

Cllr Catherine Connolly, Independent;

Cllr Colette Connolly, Labour Party;

Cllr Ruth Coppinger, Socialist Party;

Therese Caherty, CAEUC;

Bairbre De Brun, SF MEP;

Cllr Clare Daly, Socialist Party;

Margaretta D'Arcy, writer / peace activist;

Lelia Doolan, film producer / director;

Rita Fagan, community activist;

Cllr Toireasa Ferris, SF;

Cllr Gráinne Mhic Géidigh, SF;

Sinead Kennedy, academic / VoteNo.ie;

Mary Lou McDonald, MEP;

Sandra McAvoy, teacher / women's rights activist;

Patricia McKenna, People's Movement;

Marie O'Connor, health analyst and writer;

Cathleen O'Neill educator and community activist;

Brid Smith, Unite.

Ailbhe Smyth,academic and People Before Profit;

[Sub-X]

New Poll shows Lisbon Referendum could be defeated- NO Vote shows 17% increase
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87843
June 05, 2008

YES -30; NO -35 ; Don't Know- 35

A new Irish Times poll to be published in the paper in the morning, shows the Yes side at 30%, down five percentage points since their last poll three weeks ago, while the 'No' side is standing at 35%, up by an astounding 17%.

Those who responded with 'Don't Know' are down by 12 points to 35%

While the detail of the poll has not yet been published, it seems likely that in the last week many people who formerly had not decided how they would vote have now plumped for the safe option of voting against the Lisbon Treaty. A No vote means all existing EU institutions stay as they are now, while a Yes vote to pass the treaty would result in sweeping and drastic changes to the European Union.

It is not clear how the mainstream political parties - Labour, Fianna Fáil, and Fine Gael (weareallthesame.ie) will respond to the news that a sizable amount of their voters are intending to side with Sinn Fein and other left wing parties that oppose changes to Ireland's constitution proposed by the treaty.

While the poll was taken just after the farmers union the IFA (see we.do.what.were.told.ie) decided to support the treaty, the uncertain message from the country's largest union SIPTU ( see cantdecide.com) and the former taoiseach's appearance at the tribunal (see iwonitonahorse.honest.eu) may have balanced out the effect.

Don't Knows still outnumber Yes voters and equal No voters, so with seven days to go, the treaty could still go either way - as the saying goes- a week is a long time in politics (see recycled.political.cliches.org).

[Sub-X]

Uncle EU goes walkabout in Dublin
http://www.caeuc.org/index.php?q=node/301
éirígí press release:
05-06-08

Tackling the Liars on Lisbon

éirígí activists gathered in Dublin’s Henry Street this afternoon (Thursday) to coincide with a pre-planned walk-about by some of the luminaries of the pro-Lisbon Treaty camp.

Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny, Labour leader Eamon Gilmore and Fianna Fáil minister Barry Andrews united to canvass the city centre location in the hope of garnering yes votes for next week’s (June 12) referendum.

However, onlookers witnessed éirígí’s Uncle EU shed some light on the realities of the Lisbon Treaty, much to the embarrassment of the establishment parties.

Dressed in attire reminiscent of the infamous US military recruitment icon Uncle Sam, but with the colours switched to the blue and yellow of the European Union, Uncle EU informed voters through a loudhailer what the establishment parties want them to back but are afraid to spell out.

These included: “Vote yes to Lisbon for a militarised Europe,” “Vote yes for more battle groups,” “Vote yes for a European defence agency,” and “Vote yes for a United States of Europe”.

The parties who are backing the Lisbon Treaty have become increasingly desperate in their attempts to ensure the electorate in the Twenty-Six Counties record a majority yes vote in next week’s referendum.

Faced with the growing momentum of the No campaign, Green Party minister Éamonn Ryan has threatened “chaos” if the Treaty is rejected and said such an outcome “would be very damaging to the interests of this country”.

éirígí’s Daithí Mac an Mháistír, speaking from the Henry Street protest , said Ryan’s outbursts and others like it are a signal that the pro-Treaty camp knows it is losing the battle for public opinion.

“The first tactic of the pro-Lisbon campaign was to treat the referendum as a minor issue and hope it would go unnoticed by the majority of those likely to vote No.

 “When this failed they resorted to disinformation and now, in desperation, the most powerful political machines in this state have united and resorted to scare tactics and downright lies to force through the treaty by fear.

 “éirígí will not allow these parties to peddle their propaganda to the public unchallenged and, consequently, we have confronted Kenny, Gilmore and Andrews and exposed their true colours to the public in Henry Street today. ”

Daithí continued: “Acceptance of the Lisbon Treaty will result in Ireland, becoming further entwined in an undemocratic, militarised super-state.  Our activists have highlighted this threat today in a colourful and imaginative manner and informed people about how to counter it – Vote

[Sub-X]

Silenced Europeans to deliver symbolic message to Irish people
http://www.people.ie/press/080605.pdf
5 June 2008

Location: EU Parliament office in Dublin 2.
Time: 12:30 pm
Date: Friday, 6 June 2008

Speaking today,Thomas Rupp of the Europe-wide ERC(European Referendum Campaign)said:“Europeans,on behalf of the 486 Million Europeans who have been excluded by their governments in alliance with the EU from voting in this very important constitutional treaty that takes Europe in a new direction,will deliver a symbolic message to the Irish people on Friday the 6th of June at 12:30 pm from outside the EU Parliament office in Dublin.”


“We are asking individual Irish citizens as fellow Europeans to ‘SPEAK FOR US’ the people of Europe as we have been silenced. We are asking the Irish people to remind EU politicians that the European project belongs to the people of Europe and cannot proceed in a new
direction without the approval of the peoples of Europe.”

Event description:

The European Referendum Campaign (ERC see h ttp://ireland. e rc2.org) with the support of the Peoples Movement will line the outside of the EU Parliament office in Dublin with people from countries in the EU who are being denied a referendum along with cardboard
cut-outs of all the EU prime ministers with their fingers in their ears . The message to be delivered is "SPEAK FOR ME", the mouths of the people taking part will be covered in tape.This is not a protest but the delivery of a message from the "silenced" peoples of Europe
to the Irish people.

[Sub-X]

Latest Irish poll shows EU treaty heading for defeat
http://euobserver.com/9/26281
6 June 2008

The latest poll in Ireland has revealed a shock swing to the "no" side ahead of next week's vote on the EU's Lisbon treaty.

Carried out for the Irish Times, the TNS/mrbi poll shows that those saying they intend to vote "no" has almost doubled to 35 percent (up 17 points) since their last survey three weeks ago.

The "yes" side has seen a drop of five points to 30 percent, while those undecided clock in at 28 percent (down 12 points) and seven percent do not intend to vote.

According to a detailed break down by the Irish Times of the 1,000-strong survey, the reason most often cited for voting "no" - 30 percent - is that voters say they do not know what is in the treaty or they do not understand the treaty. Only five percent cited domestic reasons for voting "no."

Those planning to vote "yes" said they would do so to keep Ireland closely involved in the EU. "Yes" supporters also said they wanted to enable the bloc to work more effectively.

The poll revealed a clear socio-economic divide, with a majority of better-off voters intending to vote "yes," and a majority among the working class planning a "no" vote. Meanwhile, older voters tended to be more positive towards the treaty, but there was only a majority of "yes" supporters among the over-50s.

The survey's result comes despite the fact that Ireland's main political parties all support the treaty, and shows there will have to be a large swing before the 12 June vote if it is to result in a "yes."

Ireland is the only one of the 27 member states to hold a referendum on the EU treaty and is facing enormous pressure to secure a "yes" vote, with a rejection likely to scupper the ratification process in the rest of the bloc.

But Dublin has had a hard time trying to sell the treaty, as it has struggled to find a headline reason for voting for the charter that the ordinary voter perceives as directly affecting them.

Reading the treaty

In addition, senior politicians, including prime minister Brian Cowen, have admitted to not reading the entire document, while deputy prime minister Mary Coughlan when questioned gave an inaccurate answer on the future number of EU commissioners foreseen under the treaty.

On top of this, a government book explaining the treaty differs in important ways to a summary of the pact produced by the referendum commission, an independent body that manages referendums in Ireland.

Instead of focussing on the detail, the government has relied on appealing to Irish citizens' generally pro-European stance, with warnings about "disasters" if the country votes "no."

The "no" side has concentrated on single issues, saying the treaty will mean Ireland loses it powers over taxes and abortion while its traditional neutrality will be undermined – all of which the government has categorically denied.

Most of Europe will be focussed on Ireland when voters go to the polls next Thursday. Some, however, are already planning for a possible "no" vote.

According to reports, the Czech Republic, which takes over the EU presidency on 1 January as the EU treaty is supposed to come into force, has prepared two papers how the EU should work in the first half of 2009 - one with the EU treaty in place and one without.

[Sub-X]

European Central Bank to raise interest rates
http://www.voteno.ie/html/European-Central-Bank-to-raise-interest-rates.htm
6 June 2008

The European Central Bank has just announced that it is considering raising interest rates at its next meeting. This raises further questions about the details of what is contained in the Lisbon Treaty.

High interest rates will have a more devastating effect in Ireland than elsewhere because Irish people carry a high level of debt due to a property bubble that was hyped up by the government and the banks.

Rising interest rates will therefore eat heavily into pay packets.

The Lisbon Treaty contains two features of a neo-liberal approach to central banking.

It makes the ECB totally independent of any democratic influence. Article 245a states that:

'It shall be independent in the exercise of its powers and in the management of its finances. Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies and the governments of the Member States shall respect that independence'.

This article helps to seal the ECB off from any democratic pressure from the people of Europe.

Article 105 continues the practice of previous treaties by stating that 'the primary objective of the European System of Central Banks shall be price stability'.

The focus on fighting inflation to the neglect of promoting full employment or lower interest rates is one of the great canons of neo-liberal economics.

Formally, the ECB takes a more extreme position than even the Bank of Japan or the US Federal Reserve.

The former is mandated to maintain close contact with its government while the latter must promote 'maximum employment' and 'moderate interest rates' as well as 'price stability'.

In their latest press release, the ECB stated that one of the reasons for raising interest rates is that they feared pressure for higher wages from the unions.

They are less concerned that high interest rates might deepen an economic slowdown and lead to increased unemployment.

By voting No to the Lisbon Treaty we can indicate our opposition to the wider neo-liberal tenor of this treaty.

[Doctor No NWO]

Articulate & very Informative facts, nice work! 
SubX you're a true credit to the PP forum

keep up the good work & pull NO punches

[Sub-X]

Lenihan warns of No vote 'incalculable damage'
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/2008/0606/breaking1.htm
06/06/2008

Minister for Finance Brian Lenihan has said a No vote in the forthcoming Lisbon Treaty referendum will do “incalculable” damage to Ireland’s standing in Europe.

Mr Lenihan was speaking this morning in the wake of the latest Irish Times opinion poll, which shows the No side is now in the lead.

According to the  Irish Times /TNS mrbi poll results, the number of people intending to vote No has almost doubled to 35 per cent (up 17 points) since the last poll three weeks ago, while the number of the Yes side has declined to 30 per cent (down 5 points).

The number of undecided voters is still a significant 28 per cent (down 12 points) , while 7 per cent won’t vote.

The findings suggest that Taoiseach Brian Cowen faces a humiliating defeat on the Lisbon Treaty unless he can galvanise support to bring about an unprecedented swing in favour of the treaty during the last week of the campaign.

Mr Lenihan insisted the Government would continue bringing its message to the electorate. “I certainly intend to fight and fight and fight again for the next week because I passionately believe this treaty is good for Ireland."

He said Ireland was facing an economic crisis and it was vital to maintain export growth to create jobs. The most important market for Ireland is in Europe and to reject the treaty would send a bad signal to our European trading partners, he told RTÉ’s Morning Ireland .

Such a vote would damage our relations with Ireland and dissipate the goodwill that exists, Mr Lenihan argued.

If Ireland votes No, “we will do incalculable damage to this country, because the signal we’re sending to our biggest market is that we are not interested in it,” he warned.

On the same programme, Sinn Féin Dublin MEP Mary Lou McDonald accepted that Ireland was in “rocky times” economically, but claimed the prudent thing to do would be to protect Ireland’s social and financial interests by voting No.

While there are economic concerns, there is also a desire among the electorate for Ireland to “consolidate” its status in Europe. She said ratification of the treaty would undermine Ireland’s position in the European institutions and damage Irish workers’ rights.

Mr Lenihan insisted there was no Plan B. Were Ireland to attempt to renegotiate the treaty, it would be entering talks in a far weaker position than previously, when Ireland held the Presidency of the EU. He said Ireland’s specific concerns on taxation and neutrality were safeguarded when the Lisbon Treaty was drawn up and these could be put at risk in any renegotiation.

“Every citizen needs to consider very, very carefully next Thursday their direct responsibility for this country, for their children and for the future of their children,” Mr Lenihan said. The Irish electorate were in the driving seat, “but they’d want to be very careful what road they drive that car on.”

Ms McDonald accused the Government of compromising Ireland’s position on tax and neutrality. She said the findings of today’s Irish Times poll show “vast” numbers of people have rejected the Government’s “sweeping generalisations and comforts” on the implications of Lisbon.

Meanwhile, Yes campaigners said they believe the latest opinion poll results are a "valid reflection" of where the mood of the country.

“These figures are a cause of concern to us on the Yes side however, we believe that this is very much there to be won. Crucially since this poll was taken the Independent Referendum Commission has debunked another five lies being propagated by the No side in this campaign, including the WTO veto and the highly emotive issue of abortion, in addition to the No side myths they previously debunked in relation to tax and neutrality," said Brendan Kiely, director of the Irish Alliance for Europe.

But anti-Lisbon Treaty campaigner and member of Siptu's education branch Kieran Allen claimed that the surge in support for the No side shows that the strategy of the Yes campaign had backfired

"I expect that the Yes side will resort to a combination of fear-mongering and concessions in the coming week. We will be told that Ireland will be marginalised; that foreign investment will be scared away; that the No campaign is run by the 'extreme' left or right.”

The European Commission declined today to comment on the Irish Times poll, calling only for voters to exercise their right to vote.

"We do not comment on opinion polls, what counts is the decision of the Irish people," Commission spokesman Johannes Laitenberger told a regular briefing in Brussels. "What I can say today is that voting matters. It is very important that the Irish people do use their right to vote."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Does anybody remember those 2 countries France and Holland before they disappered after voting no to the Nice Treaty  

[Sub-X]

Articulate & very Informative facts, nice work! 
SubX you're a true credit to the PP forum

keep up the good work & pull NO punches

Thanks,I'm glad it has been of some use to people 

[Sub-X]

Lisbon Treaty faces rejection as No vote doubles in latest poll
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/frontpage/2008/0606/1212696236403.html
6 June 2008

THE LISBON Treaty could face a shock rejection with the No side now in the lead, according to the findings of the latest Irish Times /TNS mrbi poll.

It will take an unprecedented swing in the last week of the campaign for the treaty to be carried.

The poll shows the number of people intending to vote No has almost doubled to 35 per cent (up 17 points) since the last poll three weeks ago, while the number of the Yes side has declined to 30 per cent (down 5 points).

The number of undecided voters is still a significant 28 per cent (down 12 points) while 7 per cent won't vote.

The massive increase by the No vote since the last poll has mainly come through gains among undecided voters but, even more ominously for the Yes side, it has lost some support to the No camp.

While the final outcome is still in the hands of undecided voters, the clear momentum is now with the No campaign and it will take a dramatic shift in public attitudes over the next few days for the Yes side to win.

The swing to the No camp has not been prompted by domestic considerations, with just 5 per cent of those opposed to the treaty saying they are influenced by a desire to protest against the Government.

The reason most often cited by No voters is that they don't know what they are voting for or they don't understand the treaty - with 30 per cent of No voters listing this as the main reason for their decision.

The poll was conducted last Tuesday and Wednesday among a representative sample of 1,000 voters in face-to-face interviews at 100 sampling points in all 43 constituencies.

It was taken in the middle of the controversy over the World Trade Organisation talks.

That issue came to a head on Tuesday afternoon with the announcement by the Irish Farmers Association that it would support a Yes vote following the declaration by the Taoiseach, Brian Cowen, that he would use the veto to block any deal unacceptable to Ireland if the issue was put to a vote.

The poll showed that farmers are opposed to the treaty by 34 per cent to 31 per cent. The No majority among working-class C2DE voters is much bigger, with Labour voters shifting in large numbers from the Yes side.

It indicates that opposition to the treaty expressed by some trade unionists is having an impact.

In class terms, the Yes campaign is only ahead among better-off ABC1 voters.

Fianna Fáil voters continue to back the treaty but even in that category the No campaign has made massive strides in the past three weeks with a gain of 15 points to 25 per cent, while the proportion of Yes voters has fallen by five points to 42 per cent.

A clear majority of Fine Gael voters are now against the treaty - by 40 per cent to 30 per cent.

Among Labour voters there has been a massive turnaround with the No side almost doubling its support to 47 per cent with 30 per cent of party supporters in favour.

Ironically, given the party's previous stance on the EU, strong support for the treaty comes from Green Party supporters.

Sinn Féin voters are overwhelming in the No side, in line with their party's position.

The poll reveals the persistence of a significant difference in the attitudes of men and women to the treaty with women less likely to be in favour, although the biggest proportion of women are still in the undecided camp.

Across the age groups, older people are more positively disposed towards voting Yes but only among the over-50s was there a majority for the treaty. The highest proportion of No voters came from the 35 to 49 age group.

In regional terms the No lead is biggest in Munster, it was narrow in Dublin and the two sides are evenly matched in the rest of Leinster and Connacht-Ulster.

When asked for the main reasons why they had decided to vote No, not knowing what the treaty was about came first, followed by a wish to keep Ireland's power and identity.

The preservation of neutrality came next.

Those voting Yes cited keeping Ireland closely involved in the EU as their top reason followed by enabling the EU to work more effectively. Concerns about the country's economic future came next.

[Sub-X]

CÓIR : Street Extravangza for a 'NO' vote
http://www.lisbonvote.com/
6/6/2008

PRESS RELEASE

On the last Saturday before the people vote on June 12th in the Lisbon referendum, COir will hold a street extravaganza for the "NO" vote.

Beginning at 1pm at the GPO on Dublin's O'Connell Street Cóir volunteers will bring posters, leaflets, balloons, music and street theatre to emphasise the reasons why Lisbon is a bad treaty for Ireland and for Europe. They will also unfurl a large banner at the GPO declaring "People died for your freedom, Don't give it away, Vote No".

"We'll have lots of Cóir volunteers, many with their families, explaining the reasons for voting No to shoppers and urging 'No' voters to get out and cast their votes, said Richard Greene of Cóir. It'll be a very positive and upbeat event."

He also welcomed the results of the latest TNS/mrbi poll on the Lisbon referendum which showed the 'NO' vote surging ahead. "We're pleased but it is not entirely unexpected since we’ve seen these results on our canvass all week. People are telling us at the doors that, while they were previously undecided, they are now definitely voting 'NO'."

Mr Greene said that Cóir had just completed a tally of a selection of their canvassing teams nationwide and that 'Don't Knows' were transferring to 'NO' votes at almost twice the rate of those transferring to a'Yes' vote. He said that Coir's canvass had made a crucial and telling difference to the campaign since the political parties had failed utterly in getting their grassroots members out to canvass in favour of the Lisbon Treaty.

"We're hearing everywhere that we are the first and only people to call to the door to offer information and to explain the treaty,"� said Mr Greene. "Voters are telling us that they find this extraordinary “ as if the government is simply telling them to do what they are told. He added that people had said repeatedly that they haven't been given one good reason to vote for Lisbon.

"It's all still to play for though," concluded Mr Greene, who said the Cóir canvass would continue until the last possible minute. 6,000 additional posters were erected by the campaign around the country in the past few days reminding voters of the fatal errors in the treaty.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CÓIR : Rise in NO vote "expected from nationwide canvass"
http://www.lisbonvote.com/
6/6/2008

PRESS RELEASE

Cóir have welcomed the results of the latest TNS/mrbi poll on the Lisbon referendum which shows the 'No' vote surging ahead. "We're delighted," said spokesman Richard Greene, "but it is not entirely unexpected since we've seen these results on our canvass all week. People are telling us at the doors that, while they were previously undecided, they are now definitely voting 'No'."

Mr Greene said that Cóir had just completed a tally of a selection of their canvassing teams nationwide and that 'Don't Knows' were transferring to 'No' votes at twice the rate of those transferring to a 'Yes' vote. He said that Cóir's canvass had made a crucial and telling difference to the campaign since the political parties had "failed utterly in getting their grassroots members out to canvass in favour of the Lisbon Treaty."

"We're hearing everywhere that we are the first and only people to call to the door to offer information and to explain the treaty,"� said Mr Greene. "Voters are telling us that they find this extraordinary as if the government is simply telling them to do what they are told." He added that people had said repeatedly that they haven't been given one good reason to vote for Lisbon.

The Cóir spokesman added that the 'Yes' campaign tactic of making highly personalised attacks on individuals and spokespersons working for a No vote to the Lisbon Treaty had backfired.

Mr Greene said that "Our politicians can't sell this treaty, because this is a bad treaty for Ireland and for Europe," he said. "This is what they are reduced to in this campaign“ and it's not working for them."It's all still to play for though," concluded Mr Greene, who said the Cóir canvass would continue until the last possible minute. 6,000 additional posters were erected by the campaign around the country in the past few days reminding voters of the fatal errors in the treaty.

[Sub-X]

Vetos on trade to go
http://www.caeuc.org/index.php?q=node/303
Press statement – June 6 2008 – immediate release.

Vetos on trade to go – privatisation of health to come Yes side must say where and how vetos would exist in future.

The supporters of the Lisbon Treaty, including the Commission, have asserted that a veto exists on the current negotiations at the WTO on account of the mixed nature of the areas under negotiation, and because vetos remain in respect of some areas covered by the proposed agreement.

We call on the government to make known what aspects of the agreement allow a veto: what services or other tradeables are included on which there is a member state veto on the EU proposal?

Supporters of Lisbon assert that a veto will remain – under Lisbon – in the same manner as at present. We disagree: Lisbon would remove the vetos on EU trade proposals.

The Lisbon Treaty would remove the veto on EU proposals for trade in health, education, social, cultural and audiovisual services. This would lead to a creeping privatisation of these services: the profit motive would determine how services are run, who gets access, and the quality of the service.

Other tradeables, such as transport and intellectual property rights (not referred to in Art 188 – the Common Commercial Policy), are to be decided upon for purposes of internal policy by QMV. In the absence of a veto on internal policy changes, no veto exists for external trade agreements. (See below – Art. Numbers are for current TEC and Lisbon)

We call upon the government, all supporters of Lisbon including the European Commission, and the Referendum Commission to say explicitly and specifically under which treaty provisions a veto would exist in future negotiations at the WTO and in the GATS.

Ends.

Further comment: Brendan Young 085 713 1903 Barry Finnegan 085 142 3454

Notes:

The EU has exclusive competence in the negotiation and conclusion of international trade agreements, as stated in Article 2B TFEU. The procedures for such agreements are covered by Art 188c and 188n. QMV applies in both cases, other than exceptional cases with very narrow application.

Where trade agreements include areas for which unanimity is required for internal policy-making, unanimity is also necessary for external trade agreements covering those areas. Decision making in all of these areas would be by QMV – meaning no veto on external trade agreements such as EU trade proposals the GATS or WTO.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

C 306/46 EN Official Journal of the European Union 17.12.2007

TFEU

Article 2 B
1. The Union shall have exclusive competence in the following areas:
(a) customs union;
(b) the establishing of the competition rules necessary for the functioning of the internal market;
(c) monetary policy for the Member States whose currency is the euro;
(d) the conservation of marine biological resources under the common fisheries policy;
(e) common commercial policy.
Art 188: decisions by QMV – exceptions in 4a and 4b

2. The Union shall also have exclusive competence for the conclusion of an international agreement when its conclusion is provided for in a legislative act of the Union or is necessary to enable the Union to exercise its internal competence, or insofar as its conclusion may affect common rules or alter their scope.

Article 2 C
1. The Union shall share competence with the Member States where the Treaties confer on it a competence which does not relate to the areas referred to in Articles 2 B and 2 E.

2. Shared competence between the Union and the Member States applies in the following principal areas:

internal market;
Art 43, 49: decisions by QMV

social policy, for the aspects defined in this Treaty;
Art 137: decisions by QMV

economic, social and territorial cohesion;
Art 159, 161, 162: decisions by QMV

agriculture and fisheries, excluding the conservation of marine biological resources;
Art. 37: decisions by QMV

environment;
Art 175: decisions by QMV except fiscal issues

consumer protection;
Art 153: decisions by QMV

transport;
Art 70: decisions by QMV

trans-European networks;
Art 156: decisions by QMV

energy;
Art 176a: decisions by QMV except fiscal issues

area of freedom, security and justice;
Art 61 and others: decisions by QMV

common safety concerns in public health matters, for the aspects defined in this Treaty. Art 152: decisions by QMV
In the areas of research, technological development and space, the Union shall have competence to carry out activities, in particular to define and implement programmes;
Art 163: (implementation) decisions by QMV, except definition of programmes

however, the exercise of that competence shall not result in Member States being prevented from exercising theirs.

Article 2 E
The Union shall have competence to carry out actions to support, coordinate or supplement the actions of the Member States. The areas of such action shall, at European level, be:

protection and improvement of human health;
Art 152: decisions by QMV

industry;
Art 157: decisions by QMV

culture;
Art 151: decisions by QMV

tourism;
Art 176b: decisions by QMV

education, vocational training, youth and sport;
Art 150: decisions by QMV

civil protection;
Art 176c: decisions by QMV

administrative cooperation.
Art 176d: decisions by QMV

Other policy areas where trade has an impact:

Intellectual Property rights
Art 97a: decisions by QMV, except 'language arrangements'.

Direct Investment (FDI)
Art 57: decisions by QMV.
Art 57.3: unan for steps backward re liberalisation of movement of capital to or from third countries

Art 16 provides the legal base for EU law on how services of general economic interest are to be operated – which would influence the tradibility of such services.
Decision making by QMV

[Godfather77]

Brussels to consider plans for European army as Ireland set to kill EU constitution with referendum 'No' vote
By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 1:23 PM on 06th June 2008
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1024630/Brussels-consider-plans-European-army-Ireland-set-kill-EU-constitution-referendum-No-vote.html

The European parliament is set to consider plans for the EU to have its own army, it emerged today.  Polish foreign affairs committee chairman Jacek Saryusz-Wolski called for every member states to contribute to a European peace-keeping force that would be controlled from Brussels.

The news comes as EU constitution faces being scuppered within days after an opinion poll last night showed Irish voters were set to reject the controversial treaty in a referendum next week. 

The re-emergence of the idea of a European army will please the French who have made it clear that strengthening the EU’s military is one of their priorities during their six-month presidency.

The French will also call for EU states to significantly increase their defence spending.  They also want more helicopters and aircraft to be made available for missions.

Foreign Secretary David Miliband raised the prospect of an EU army late last year when he said that the EU should be better prepared to fight conflict around the world.  He called for the EU to be a ‘model power of regional cooperation’ which was not afraid to use military force.  The proposals will be unveiled by French President Nicolas Sarkozy in two weeks time.

The new proposals come as Europe's joint defence efforts were slammed today as "impoverished and amateurish" - with only one fifth of European armed forces battle-ready.  European armies are not being modernised and many countries are so "miserly" on military costs that sharing the burden of running a European security and defence policy is impossible, according to Andrew Duff, a Liberal Democrat MEP and member of the European Council on Foreign relations.

Mr Duff warned: "Member states are dreadfully complacent about the present state of the EU's common foreign and security policy.  "It's all very well having a grand European security strategy, but it should be followed. In fact EU governments have ignored their own strategy."

He went on: "The UK and France have failed to deliver what the St Malo agreement promised in terms of integration.  "Other countries have insisted on a miserly and self-defeating policy that military costs should 'lie where they fall'.  "What is the point of that when the aim is to share the burden?"

Mr Duff said research conducted by the European Council on Foreign Relations and due to be published soon showed that, for a variety of reasons, only one fifth of European armies were fully ready at any one time.

In Germany, for political reasons, there is a strict limit on troop deployment abroad, while elsewhere other operational and financial curbs mean that 80% of forces are serving solely on home soil, limiting the scope of joint ventures.

Mr Duff said: "European armies are not being modernised.  "Only 20 per cent of EU armed forces - that's almost two million troops - can actually fight." went on Mr Duff.

The proposed army will be one policy voters may consider when making their decision over the EU constitution next Thursday.

Despite having less than one per cent of the Union's 490million population, the small nation could kill off the controversial treaty because it must be passed unanimously by all 27 member states.  A TNS/mrbi poll published in today's  Irish Times shows 35 per cent of people surveyed intend to vote "No" in the ballot next Thursday, more than double the 17 per cent seen in the newspaper's last survey three weeks ago.

The opinion poll showed those planning to vote in favour of the treaty stood at 30 per cent, down from 35 per cent in the previous poll. The proportion of undecided voters was 28 per cent while 7 per cent said they would not vote, according to the survey of 1,000 voters conducted throughout Ireland.

[Sub-X]

Irish Times: Peace groups accuse Referendum Commission of bias
http://www.caeuc.org/index.php?q=node/310
Eoin Burke-Kennedy
06/06/2008

Anti-war groups accuse Commission

A coalition of anti-war groups has accused the Referendum Commission of being “utterly biased” in suggesting Ireland’s neutrality will be unaffected by the Lisbon Treaty.

At a joint press conference in Dublin today, several organisations campaigning for a No vote claimed the commission was deliberately playing down elements of the treaty which dealt with the creation a common defence policy and the inherent threat these posed to Irish neutrality.

Irish Anti-War Movement chairman Richard Boyd Barret said it was “patently nonsense, even from a cursory reading of the text” to suggest Irish neutrality would be unaffected.

Mr Boyd Barret said Article 28 of the treaty clearly sets out the agenda for a more militarised European Union and creates the legal basis for a European army.

“Although a common defence policy had to be agreed in line with the constitutional requirements of member states, it did not alter the fact that there will be a common defence policy,” he said.

“By signing up to this we are signing up to the idea that there will be a common defence in Europe which Ireland will be part of.”

Carol Fox of the Peace and Neutrality Alliance (PANA) said her organisation was extremely concerned about the information being disseminated by the Referendum Commission regarding defence and military issues contained in the treaty.

Ms Fox said PANA had written to the Commission complaining that its summary of the treaty, sent to each household last month, contained no mention of the permanent structural cooperation between member states in areas of defence envisaged under the treaty.

“Or the fact that the treaty is going to allow for mini military alliances to be established within the EU and for a core group of states to go forward to form a common defence policy”

PANA’s chairman Roger Cole said that under the leadership of the Yes campaigners, Ireland had become "essentially a US aircraft carrier and an integral part of George Bush’s war machine”.

He said: “These politicians have totally destroyed Ireland’s long-standing policy of neutrality which has been an integral part of the State’s foreign policy since its foundation”.

[Sub-X]

WP Press Release: Plans to beef up EU military might
http://www.caeuc.org/index.php?q=node/305
06 June 2008

FRENCH PRESIDENCY DELAYING PLANS TO BEEF UP EU MILITARY MIGHT

The French Presidency of the European Union is waiting until the Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty is over before it announces its plans for the beefing up of the EUs military capacity, including major spending increases, according to the Workers’ Party.

Workers Party Lisbon Treaty campaign director Padraig Mannion said that if reports carried by the BBC this morning (Friday) are correct, plans are already being prepared for EU military spending to be increased to 6% of GDP with a greater number of ‘rapid reaction forces’ and a vastly increased number of attack aircraft. (SEE LINK BELOW)

Mr. Mannion said that the plans are due to be unveiled by French President Nicolas Sarkozy a few days after the Irish referendum. Monsieur Sarkozy will head the French presidency of the European Union from July 1st.

“We already know for a fact, through leaked e-mails, that the EU governments have tried to bury any negative news and withhold controversial announcements until after Ireland holds its referendum on June 12th, therefore we must take this report by the BBC seriously. What France is proposing is in effect the EU army which Lisbon is laying the grounds for”, said Mr. Mannion.

“Even if the French do not get it all their own way with these plans, there is no doubt that further EU military expansion will go ahead and the only thing that can stop that now is a No vote by the Irish people next Thursday. That is why it is essential for those who oppose the further militarization of the EU to come out and vote No to the Lisbon Treaty” declared Padraig Mannion.

Ref: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7439104.stm

[Sub-X]

Dutch MPs vote in favour of Lisbon Treaty
http://euobserver.com/9/26278
06.06.2008

The House of Commons in the Netherlands passed the Lisbon Treaty on Wednesday evening with a wide majority, some three years after the Dutch people rejected the constitutional treaty in a popular referendum.

With the governing Labour Party and Christian Democrats, together with the market-liberal People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) voting in favour of the ratification of the treaty, the legislation passed easily.
 
Only the left-wing Socialist Party (SP), the Freedom Party of hard-right anti-Islam provocateur Geert Wilders and the Party for the Animals, an animal rights party with two seats in the chamber, voted against.

The Dutch Senate still has yet to approve the document, however. The upper house is expected to debate the treaty over the summer.

Three years ago, in June 2005, the European Union was dealt a body blow when the Netherlands voted heavily against the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe.

The win for the 'Nee', or 'No' side – a powerful 61.5 percent of voters on a turnout of 63.3 percent - together with a strong 'Non' from France the month before, effectively killed off the European Constitutional project.

This time around, European leaders have ensured that the new treaty has not been put before citizens in referenda, with the exception of Ireland, where one is constitutionally required. Instead, parliaments are simply ratifying it.

The two Dutch governing parties have said it was not necessary to consult the population a second time because what was now on the table was only a classic modification treaty, stripped of its constitutional trappings.

Additionally in the Lisbon Treaty, argued Dutch Prime Minister Jan-Peter Balkenende, national parliaments are to play a greater role in the European legislative process, with the ability to put a halt to legislation they object to.

However, the SP, whose support has soared since it took the lead in the 2005 campaign against the constitution, steadily eating away at the centre-left Labour Party's support base, argued that there was little difference between the two treaties.

SP Europe spokesperson Harry van Bommel presented a 42,000-signature petition against the Lisbon Treaty to the parliament ahead of the vote, but to no avail, with the chamber rejecting his proposal for a second referendum.

During the debate, Mr van Bommel said: "It is a disgrace that there is still no public version of the Treaty of Lisbon available.

"Obviously one does not want to inform the population," he added.

After the vote, VVD house leader Han Ten Broeke rubbished the idea that the treaties were the same. "Even if less than five per cent has changed, … your DNA differs by only two per cent from that of a monkey, but the difference is still fundamental," he said, according to Radio Netherlands.

The Dutch Green Left party had mixed feelings about the treaty, which in the end they supported. Green MP Mariko Peters said: "It is an great moment because we stand to ratify a new treaty concerning Europe. At the same time is a sad moment because democracy failed."

All eyes are now on Ireland, which has its say on the treaty on 12 June.

[White Rose Sophie]

European Parliament to ban Eurosceptic groups
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/2038813/European-Parliament-to-ban-Eurosceptic-groups.html
27/05/2008

The row over the new EU Treaty meanwhile took a new turn yesterday after José Manuel Barroso, the Commission President, warned Irish voters that they will “pay” if they reject the document in a referendum next month.

Speaking in Brussels on Monday night, Mr Barroso attempted to head off growing opposition to the Treaty by threatening outcast status for Ireland.

”If there was a ‘No’ in Ireland or in another country, it would have a very negative effect for the EU. We will all pay a price for it, Ireland included, if this is not done in a proper way,” he said.

Oh my gosh - what #@%$^ bullying!!!!!!!!!

THAT alone should give the Irish people a clue on how to vote!   

[Sub-X]

Oh my gosh - what #@%$^ bullying!!!!!!!!!

THAT alone should give the Irish people a clue on how to vote!   

You are so right,the EU and its representatives have shown the people of Europe nothing but contempt.Most of the Irish politicians pushing for a yes vote admittedly have not read the Treaty and show by the polls we are not happy and in 5 days they will see unhappy people in this country really are,but this is not just about us,its about the other 480 million people of Europe.

[Sub-X]

Lisbon treaty- does it affect our health options?
http://www.asthmacare.ie/blog/?p=189
June 06th, 2008

European consumer organizations urge Irish voters to say ‘No’ to Lisbon Treaty

Six non-governmental organizations (NGOs), collectively representing consumers from all 27 European Union (EU) countries, are strongly urging Irish voters to vote ‘No’ in Ireland’s upcoming referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. Rather than resulting in Europe becoming “more efficient”, as the treaty’s supporters claim it would do, the NGOs are deeply concerned that a ‘Yes’ vote in Ireland on June 12 and the treaty’s subsequent enforcement by Brussels would only further worsen the EU’s growing democratic deficiencies. The supposed political and procedural efficiencies that would result from the treaty’s ratification, they argue, can only be achieved via the further compromising of democracy, personal privacy and freedom of choice - all three of which are now increasingly under threat in the EU.
 
“Italians and people from many other European nations are relying on Ireland to send a strong message to the European bureaucracy: Is it so difficult to understand that people in Europe want more of a say in their political future? A united Europe may be a positive development but it becomes meaningless and even damaging if the decision to unite is not made by the people themselves and the way to do it is determined over our heads,” says Kathleen Gordon, speaking for La Leva di Archimede. “After all, should it not be our Europe?”
 
Dr Robert Verkerk, executive director of the Alliance for Natural Health, said: “The citizens of Europe are fast realizing that the European game plan extends way beyond just a common market, but now encroaches on some of the principles democracies the world over have held most dear, especially freedom of speech and freedom of choice. One of the areas likely to be most compromised is our freedom of choice in healthcare, and particularly our freedom to choose natural or alternative approaches, including the avoidance of vaccinations for our children. We urge the people of Ireland to vote ‘no’ on June 12 - a ‘yes’ vote is little more than a slippery slope to centralized, dictatorial control from Brussels”
 
Paul Anthony Taylor, External Relations Director of the Dr. Rath Health Foundation and the campaign’s coordinator, added: “Surveys show that a majority of European citizens want referendums on the Lisbon Treaty. Nevertheless, despite the fact that citizens in France and the Netherlands had already voted ‘No’ to 95 percent of its content in 2005, European governments, including those of France and the Netherlands, have chosen to sign this treaty against the will of the people and without referendums. This is not democracy, but dictatorship, and an ominous sign of what is to come if this treaty is adopted. European citizens should have the right to control their own lives and make their own decisions about what is best for themselves and their families. A ‘No’ vote in Ireland on June 12 would therefore send a strong signal to the EU that any political system must retain the support and respect of its citizens, rather than their resentment, or else it will perish.”
 
Lutz Kliche, Chairman of the Alliance for Health, Peace and Social Justice commented: “It is truly outrageous that in an issue of such significance and long term consequences for their future, the citizens of Europe are not allowed to decide. Looking at the way the so called “reform treaty” was pushed through the German parliament and the Bundesrat (which includes state governments), two things become more than clear: the treaty is of utter importance to the power groups in Europe, and by no means are we, the people, considered to have a say in this. This gives great importance to the decision of the Irish people, them being the only ones who have to be consulted by constitution. We therefore call upon our Irish co-European citizens to reject the reform treaty as a fraudulent manoeuvre, a dirty trick, to take away basic citizen’s rights under the guise of so-called progress. This progress only serves the multinationals and their stakeholders.”
 
Scott Tips, President of the National Health Federation, stated: “Given that the Irish referendum is the only vote being held on this treaty, it is extremely important that this referendum is being held and that the desires of the citizens of Ireland be heard. It is unfortunate however that other European member states have chosen not to allow their citizens to vote on this issue and I therefore congratulate the Irish government for evidently being the most democratic state in the European Union and permitting this vote to take place.”

Zeus Information Service hopes that the Irish people will vote ‘No’ and turn the European Project into disarray. Louise McLean, its Editor, said: “A strong ‘No’ vote is threatened by Irish farmers who realise that EU legislation will severely hamper their agricultural industry. In what is termed by the EU as ‘Post-Democracy’ we will see a massive assault on our freedoms and privacy as Common Law - which has been enjoyed for centuries in the UK - is swept away. There are powerful moves through EU directives to curb our right to buy or treat ourselves with natural therapies, food supplements and alternative medicines. Little do people know that 110,000 EU laws which have quietly been transposed into UK law will be enforced after the new Lisbon Treaty is ratified and most certainly by 1st January 2009.  Something very sinister called Common Purpose has now infiltrated every institution in Europe to prepare people for membership of the European Union.”
 
The six organizations are campaigning for citizens to have the right to vote in referendums whenever significant changes to laws affecting them are made at either national or European level. The campaign, the European Referendum Initiative, is being backed by the Alliance for Health, Peace and Social Justice; the Alliance for Natural Health; the Dr. Rath Health Foundation; La Leva di Archimede; the National Health Federation; and Zeus Information Service.

[White Rose Sophie]

You are so right,the EU and its representatives have shown the people of Europe nothing but contempt.Most of the Irish politicians pushing for a yes vote admittedly have not read the Treaty and show by the polls we are not happy and in 5 days they will see unhappy people in this country really are,but this is not just about us,its about the other 480 million people of Europe.

What a wonderful chance to show the world what the FIGHTING IRISH are made of!!!!  Imagine the honor/responsibility of speaking for the 'silenced Europeans" - those people who voted NO 2 years ago and whose politicians have 'dumped' on. 
Thanks Sub, for one of the most informative and valuable threads on the forum.

[dogmadestroyer]

I really hope the NO votes will be able to overcome whatever vote fraud and media manipulation there will be. I think it would be very symbolic for a country to throw out this straightjacket constitution that has been subsidized as heavily as Ireland.

[Sub-X]

What a wonderful chance to show the world what the FIGHTING IRISH are made of!!!!  Imagine the honor/responsibility of speaking for the 'silenced Europeans" - those people who voted NO 2 years ago and whose politicians have 'dumped' on. 
Thanks Sub, for one of the most informative and valuable threads on the forum.

This is one of things I hope for most is that people of this country are fully aware of the responsibility that is in our hands.

I can't remember the quote exactly but the whole plan was once EU was set up in and place the rest world would follow suit,this is exactly what we are seeing right on,NAU,SAU,Asian Union all being discussed and implamented only in the last couple of months.

Another thing I realized in the last couple of days is the amount of changes in leadership this year alone,Ireland,U.K,France,Italy and the U.S in November,coincidence I don't believe in them,also it must be noted that 3 of these leaders have held office over a long period of time.Just something to think about.

[Sub-X]

I really hope the NO votes will be able to overcome whatever vote fraud and media manipulation there will be. I think it would be very symbolic for a country to throw out this straightjacket constitution that has been subsidized as heavily as Ireland.

This is where the arrogance of our politicians plays its part,this was a fore gone conclusion as far as they were concerned,they tell us how to vote and we do it,but in the last couple of days proven to them this isn't going to be the case,so I really don't think they considered voting fraud,as for media manipulation well we have seen that from the very beginning of the campaign,and as the recent polls have proven it hasn't worked.

I mean has anybody ever heard of a case of telling people if they don't understand the treaty just don't vote at all,I mean that is just crazy in times when its so hard to get people to vote in the first place,boggles the mind.

[White Rose Sophie]

This is one of things I hope for most is that people of this country are fully aware of the responsibility that is in our hands.

I can't remember the quote exactly but the whole plan was once EU was set up in and place the rest world would follow suit,this is exactly what we are seeing right on,NAU,SAU,Asian Union all being discussed and implamented only in the last couple of months.

Another thing I realized in the last couple of days is the amount of changes in leadership this year alone,Ireland,U.K,France,Italy and the U.S in November,coincidence I don't believe in them,also it must be noted that 3 of these leaders have held office over a long period of time.Just something to think about.

No, I don't believe in coincidence either. And your point about the other different "Unions" is well put. Alice Bailey's strategy is coming the fore, is it not?

 One reason this thread is so valuable is that it allows us Yanks to see that it is not just US fighting the 'one-world government' demon, but that others are also in the fight.  And we get so little true information about what is going on in other countries' politics - jeez -what does one expect when we get little to no truth about our OWN politician's machinations? 

[stangrof]

Good evening, friends. E.U is a cover-up for a big and sadly usual money scam. The E.U was founded by a french-american bankster named jean monnet.                                                                          He was the head of the European alcohol smuggle during the prohibition, then became a j.p Morgan boy and start the E.U by agreement on coal and iron
He got married in Moscow in 1934. How come a "banker" got married in Moscow during the hight of Stalin's worst repression period? never mind .                                                                              After WW2, the national central bank have been seized by the states and became public. How the banksters could reach back our pockets? Very easily!
In the maastricht treaty, the article 104 ( now 123 in the constitution/Lisbon treaty ) prohibits the states of the euro zone to borrow money from the nationals central banks including the European central bank.                                                                                                                                  No more public money, well what choice is left? the private banks of course! that little trick cost  France 80 billions euros of interests a year( and the principal have to be repaid too ) just to have euros to exchange!
Good bye

[Sub-X]

Latest Dangerous French plans on Corporate Tax laid bare
http://corporatetax.blogspot.com/2008/06/latest-dangerous-french-plans-on.html
June 7, 2008

Fears as French to push for tax-rate harmony

Harmonisation of business taxes will be the number one priority of the French Presidency of the European Commission, which begins next month, officials from the French Department of Finance told business leaders.

A meeting of Medef, the largest French business lobby group, was told that Nicolas Sarkozy's government plans to bring forward concrete measures aimed at harmonising the European corporate tax base and, by extension, all tax rates, as early as September.

This would seem to undermine assurances given by Jose Barosso, the president of the European Commission, on a visit to Ireland last April when he said that Ireland's tax rates would not be threatened.

There is also evidence that the European Commission may be deliberately hiding plans to harmonise corporate tax rates until after Ireland goes to the polls on the Lisbon Treaty.....

The Irish Independent has seen copies of the agenda prepared for the July 2 meeting of the European Commission's 'Competitiveness Council'. It shows the plans have now developed to the point that Laszlo Kovacs, the EU Commissioner for Taxation and Customs Union, and the main driver of the tax harmonisation plans, was due to give a presentation on the subject to the Council...........

Turlough O'Sullivan, director general of business lobby group IBEC, said: "I am absolutely convinced this is a Trojan horse to bring in common tax rates."

Ireland can veto the proposals, whether or not the Lisbon Treaty is passed by next Thursday's referendum. However, this would not stop some countries using the "enhanced cooperation" mechanism of the EU to club together to harmonise their own tax bases.

Critics of the plan say Ireland would be then be pressurised to join this group.

- Tom McEnaney Business Editor

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/fears-as-french-to-push-for-taxrate-harmony-1401314.html

[Sub-X]

Appeal by 7O7 trade unionists and labour activists from 24 countries of Europe to their brothers and sisters in the Republic of lreland
http://www.people.ie/trade/appeal.pdf

Appeal by 7O7 trade unionists and labour activists from 24 countries of Europe to their brothers and sisters in the Republic of lreland

As, labour,activists and trade unionists from every country in Europe,we solemnly address this appeal to you, one month before 12 June, the date on which the people of Ireland will be called upon to give their view on the Lisbon Treaty through a referendum.

We have become aware of the reasons why the National Executive of the Technical Engineering and Electrical Union (TEEU) of Ireland is calling on its members to reject the Lisbon Treaty by voting "NO" in the referendum:"Recent key judgements by the European Court of Justice show that the pendulum has swung against workers'rights and in favour of big business.In the circumstances it would be foolish to provide the institutions of the European Union with more power.The judgements in the Laval and Viking disputes accepted workers had the right to organise in unions,only to negate its value by saying they could not undertake industrial action where it conflicted with the provision of goods and services, regardless of the social consequences.In the recent Ruffert case the Court found that a Polish subcontractor operating in Germany was entitled to pay his workers less than hctlft he agreed minimum wage for the constructions ector,b ecauset he right to provide unrestricteds entices took priority over collective wage agreernents."

We adopt this statement as our own.

We totally share this point of view, just as we share the point of view of Michael Sommer, President of the DGB,when he said: "What the three recent judgernents by the European Court of Justice have in common is that (...)they invite wage dumping through the use of foreign labour - also doing so in places where there is no minimum wage or even a binding collective agreement."

We agree with Derek Simpson,Joint General Secretary of Unite in Great Britain:"This decision effectively means that foreign companies
working here in the UK, or in any other European country, can flout domestic laws and collective agreements with regard to pay."

Or as Swedish trade unionists put it recently: "Since Sweden joined the Europeant-Union n 1995,Swedish collective agreements have been regularly put into question.This threat does not only affect wages,it means that every trade union right is at stake."

Is this not the case in each country of Europe?

Yes indeed, now the three judgements by the European Court of Justice have together become yet another instrument in the panoply of instruments,from European directives to the Stability Pact, which are all aimed at driving down labour costs and reducing public spending. 

Is it not in the name of theser equirementsw, hich were laid down in the Maastricht Treaty and restated in their entirety in the Lisbon Treaty, that pension schemes are being wound up, postal services and railways are being privatised,and public health services are being dismantled?

It is in order to fight against the disastrous consequenceosf this policy that throughout Europe- in France,Britain,Italy,Germany,Portugal,
Greece,Belgium, Sweden and elsewhere- the workers together with their trade unron organisations are standing up to defend their gains and wages,to fight against the privatisation programmes and in favour of renationalisingw hat has been privatisedi n the name of the Maastricht Treaty,the European directives and the Stability Pact.

These are the reasons why we are addressing this appeal to you.

Following the "NO" to the Constitutional Treaty voted by the peoples of France and the Netherlands,the big coalition of governments
has ruled out any democratic expression by denying each of the peoples of Europe the chance to give their verdict on the Lisbon Treaty throught he referendum process.

Everywhere except in Ireland,where they have been unable to bypass the Constitution.

We know very well that you are coming under pressure from all of the European institutions and the forces that
serve their interests.

This is why we solemnly say to you: You are not alone!The eyes and hopes of all the workers, of all the trade unionists and labour activists in every country of Europe are turned towards Ireland.
The Irish referendum has become our common cause.

By voting "NO" to the Lisbon Treaty, you will be expressing the resistance of all the workers, trade unionists and labour activists
of Europe.

NO to the Lisbon Treaty!

[Sub-X]

Lisbon: “Speak for the people of Europe”
http://www.people.ie/press/080606.pdf
6 June 2008

Patricia McKenna (former Green Party MEP and chairperson of the People’s Movement)said today at the demonstration outside the EU Parliament building in Dublin at 12:30 pm:

“The Peoples Movement are appalled at how the most powerful politicians in Europe have turned a deaf ear to and silenced the voices of the people they claim to represent. They have conspired to deny the people of Europe any further say on the future direction of the EU.”

“The politician elite of Europe are actively working to keep the direction and real purpose of the Lisbon treaty hidden, until after the Irish people have voted. This treaty will take 486 million Europeans in a new direction without their consent. We are asking the Irish people to
‘Speak for the people of Europe’ who have been silenced.”

“The purpose of this People’s Movement event is to highlight the refusal of politicians throughout Europe to listen to the people and we have invited people from other member states to participate to highlight the denial of their right to be heard. The European project can only proceed with the consent of the peoples of Europe based on democracy.”

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lisbon: the Irish people “get it”
http://www.people.ie/press/080605b.pdf
June 2008

Patricia McKenna (former Green Party MEP and chairperson of the People's Movement) said today in response to the Irish Times opinion poll:

“The Peoples Movement welcomes the momentum now building to reject the Lisbon Treaty.
This has happened because the Irish people have not responded to the spin and bullying applied to con them into accepting something that is bad not just for Ireland but for all of Europe.”

“In the remaining days we expect the vicious campaign and personalised attacks against those advocating a NO vote to increase as the political elite becomes more frustrated as the Irish people prepare to reject this appalling treaty, that is an affront to European democracy and Irish Independence.”

[KiwiClare]

What wonderful work you're doing here SubX!

Like a gold coin on a dunghill, the truth about the EU
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1024863/Like-gold-coin-dunghill-truth-EU.html
8th June 2008

Peter Lilley's message is clear - 80 per cent of Britain's laws are now made in Brussels and Parliament has no power to reject or amend them

Amid the silly soap opera that now passes for British politics, in which we are supposed to care more about hairstyles and mannerisms than about the country, there was one moment last week when a decent man said something important. The brief flash of truth shone out like a gold coin on a dunghill.

The man was Peter Lilley, older and wiser than when he used to sing daft songs to Tory conferences. Mr Lilley looks to me as if, like several others, he is trapped in the Unconservative Party and would blossom like an irrigated desert if only he could escape from it.

Because what he said was important, there have been far too few reports of it. Hansard for Tuesday, June 3, at 3.35pm, will give you the details, if you want them.

But his clear, hard message was that 80 per cent of our laws are now made in Brussels, and Parliament has no power to reject or amend them.

If you wonder why our Post Offices are all closing, it’s thanks to an EU directive. So is the increasingly hated Data Protection Act. So are Home Improvement Packs and fortnightly bin collections.

In 15 years’ time our Parliament will have only two functions left – to raise taxes and declare war – admittedly things that our current politicians are rather keen on.

Mr Lilley’s mischievous suggestion is that MPs’ pay should be cut each time they hand over authority to others. Incredibly, many MPs don’t know what is going on. If they ended up on the wages paid to district councillors – which is all they really are now – they might care more.

His own stark words cannot be improved upon: ‘Few voters, or even members of this house, fully realise how many powers have been, or are about to be, transferred elsewhere. There are three reasons for this. The first is that governments of all persuasions deny that any significant powers are being transferred.

The second is that, once powers have been transferred, Ministers engage in a charade of pretence that they still retain those powers. Even when introducing measures that they are obliged to bring in as a result of an EU directive they behave as though the initiative were their own.

‘Indeed, Ministers often end up nobly accepting responsibility for laws that they actually opposed when they were being negotiated in Brussels.’

So now you know. Not since Dunkirk, 68 years ago, has our national independence been so imperilled. But back then, we could see the danger. Now most of us pretend it isn’t there.

[KiwiClare]

 Let's talk tough with our EU friends. They might even like it

By Norman Blackwell
Last Updated: 12:01am BST 08/06/2008
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/06/08/do0802.xml

This is the crunch week for the Lisbon treaty. The Government's attempt to duck its promise of a referendum - by claiming that the treaty is fundamentally different from the EU constitution rejected in 2005 - faces its final challenges. On Monday, the High Court starts hearing a judicial review of that decision, brought by businessman Stuart Wheeler.

On Wednesday, as legislation enacting the treaty goes through its final stages in the Lords, peers vote on whether to enforce that referendum commitment. On Thursday, the people of Ireland, the only country to hold a referendum on Lisbon, have their chance to throw a spanner in the works.

Assuming it survives this triple assault (and a poll last week indicated that the Irish may yet vote No), the treaty will move inexorably towards ratification later this year. So after this week, the debate is likely to focus on what happens next. In particular, what stance should the Conservatives take?

Encouragingly, they are on record as saying that without a referendum, Lisbon will lack democratic legitimacy, and that they would not let matters rest there. That clearly means opening new negotiations - but how, and what might they achieve?

Once approved by all EU members and incorporated into the existing EU treaties, the Lisbon treaty itself will no longer be open for renegotiation. Other members will have no interest in reopening those treaties as they apply to the EU as a whole.

That does not stop the British government declaring that it is not satisfied with where this has left the UK's relationship with Europe - and, if backed by a strong mandate, setting out to negotiate changes in the way the treaties apply to this country.

What, then, should our objectives be? Clearly, the starting point should be that we want to stay part of the European family, building on free-trade relationships, joining in common programmes in areas such as security and the environment, and helping to foster peace and democracy across the continent. That does not mean signing up to "ever closer" political union and centrist bureaucracy.

We should seek to remove the UK from the provisions of Lisbon that compromise our independence in foreign policy, defence and justice. Any common policy in these areas should remain truly intergovernmental.

No future British government should be tied by common EU positions it inherits, or which arise from a majority vote on a proposal from the EU foreign minister. British courts should adjudicate British law decided by the British parliament.

The Tories have pledged in the past to repatriate control of agriculture and fishing to escape the EU's wasteful and damaging common policies in these areas. They have also pledged to reverse Labour's opt-in to the EU's social chapter in order to stop the flood of regulations that put at risk the competitiveness of British business.
    
Politics: news, video, comment and analysis

In practice this is likely to mean a substantive change in the UK's compliance with large sections of the new treaties into which these regulatory powers have now been absorbed.

At this level of negotiation, we should clear the air with a fundamental restatement of the terms of our membership of the EU, that establishes the kind of cooperative relationship with which the UK is comfortable - while allowing other countries to proceed down the path of greater political and economic union on which they seem set.

Far from being a political risk, this is exactly what the British people support, according to polls for Global Vision, the campaign group I chair. Close to half the population consistently favours a looser relationship for the UK based on free trade and cooperation - which, when added to the quarter who just want to leave, is an overwhelming mandate for change.

More than a third of voters across all parties would be more likely to support a prospective Conservative government that pledged to negotiate a change in our relationship; a quarter would be less likely. By more than two to one, the electorate would support such a change if it were put to a referendum.

To strengthen its mandate, a government pursuing this path should promise a referendum on the outcome, seeking a settlement in Europe that it can recommend wholeheartedly to the public. If some in Europe tried to frustrate that wish, they would run the risk that a British majority would favour withdrawal from the EU. Our polls show that is the likely result.

Would Europe accommodate us? There are good reasons for believing so. Europeans have more at stake in terms of exports to the UK than we do in reverse, so in reality our trading relations are unlikely to be affected. More importantly, they would realise that a needless rift with the UK would make it harder to maintain the many areas of cooperation within Europe where we all benefit from working together.

Equally, once they understood that the UK was serious, many European leaders might be glad of a resolution that let the core members of the EU pursue integration without the UK always applying the brake. Giscard d'Estaing has already raised just this possibility.

It is clear that the imposition of Lisbon on the British public need not be the end of the road. It could spur a long-awaited realignment, with which the UK is finally at ease. People are ready. All it takes is a government to give the lead.
# Lord Blackwell is chairman of Global Vision. He was head of the Prime Minister's Policy Unit under John Major.

[Sub-X]

Immunity afforded to your masters while you are subject to the law
http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=345
By Greg O Brien
8/6/2008

We have come to accept that the people we elect have privileges that the ordinary citizens don’t enjoy. Privileges in the EU are set to be further enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty/Constitution, to further alienate the accountability of the elite and the Federal State proposed by this treaty. We have also been programmed and conditioned to accept that the law only applies to the “common people”, as we’ve seen in case after case involving corruption at the highest level, while the ordinary people are jailed for not paying a television license or various types of fines.

As part of the text of the treaty are the immunities that make the members of EU even less accountable than they already are, while your rights will be under constant attack from the Charter of Fundamental Rights. First we look at the Federal State:

Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union

Article 1

The premises and buildings of the Union shall be inviolable. They shall be exempt from search, requisition, confiscation or expropriation. The property and assets of the Union shall not be the subject of any administrative or legal measure of constraint without the authorization of the Court of Justice.

Article 2

The archives of the Union shall be inviolable.

This is contrary to all we’ve been told by the politicians about the openness and accountability of the EU, and makes any judicial enquiry almost impossible, further eroding the lack of oversight that’s already inherent in this corrupt structure. There will be no body accountable to the people and overseeing the integrity of the EU, as we’ve seen in the tribunals in this country which have exposed the corruption and held the individuals to account while acting independently. They have cost a lot of money and the judiciary have made a fortune, but we have trawled through their findings and politicians have resigned over their conclusions. Next we look at the members:

Article 8

Members of the European Parliament shall not be subject to any form of inquiry, detention or legal proceedings in respect of opinions expressed or votes cast by them in the performance of their duties.

Article 9

During the sessions of the European Parliament, its Members shall enjoy:

(a) in the territory of their own State, the immunities accorded to members of their parliament;

(b) in the territory of any other Member State, immunity from any measure of detention and from legal proceedings.

Immunity shall likewise apply to Members while they are travelling to and from the place of meeting of the European Parliament.

Immunity cannot be claimed when a Member is found in the act of committing an offence and shall not prevent the European Parliament from exercising its right to waive the immunity of one of its Members.

That’s right, we can no longer question the votes cast by our elected representatives even if they vote contrary to the wishes of the people or the national interest. We have already seen how De Rossa and members of Fine Gael have voted contrary to the people but we will not be able to hold them to account under the treaty.

As for criminal offences, they have to be caught in the act of committing a crime, unlike everyone else who has to comply with the full rigors of the law and is subject to interrogation and investigation. As for the Parliament waiving immunity, that’s absolute nonsense, as we’ve seen with any State body investigating itself or one of its members. Corruption will be given a free reign in this atmosphere and not only does this apply to MEPs, but goes further by allowing the un-elected to enjoy immunity as well:

Article 10

Representatives of Member States taking part in the work of the institutions of the Union, their advisers and technical experts shall, in the performance of their duties and during their travel to and from the place of meeting, enjoy the customary privileges, immunities and facilities.

This Article shall also apply to members of the advisory bodies of the Union.

Article 17

Privileges, immunities and facilities shall be accorded to officials and other servants of the Union solely in the interests of the Union.

Each institution of the Union shall be required to waive the immunity accorded to an official or other servant wherever that institution considers that the waiver of such immunity is not contrary to the interests of the Union.

Next we look at the judiciary, which will be responsible for your fundamental rights under which you will no longer have the protection of the Constitution of Ireland to defend you against. Again they have levels of immunity unheard of in this country:

Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union

Article 2

Before taking up his duties each Judge shall, before the Court of Justice sitting in open court, take an oath to perform his duties impartially and conscientiously and to preserve the secrecy of the deliberations of the Court.

Article 3

The Judges shall be immune from legal proceedings. After they have ceased to hold office, they shall continue to enjoy immunity in respect of acts performed by them in their official capacity, including words spoken or written.

The Court of Justice, sitting as a full Court, may waive the immunity. If the decision concerns a member of the General Court or of a specialised court, the Court shall decide after consulting the court concerned.

Where immunity has been waived and criminal proceedings are instituted against a Judge, he shall be tried, in any of the Member States, only by the court competent to judge the members of the highest national judiciary.

Article 6

A Judge may be deprived of his office or of his right to a pension or other benefits in its stead only if, in the unanimous opinion of the Judges and Advocates-General of the Court of Justice, he no longer fulfils the requisite conditions or meets the obligations arising from his office. The Judge concerned shall not take part in any such deliberations. If the person concerned is a member of the General Court or of a specialised court, the Court shall decide after consulting the court concerned.

The Registrar of the Court shall communicate the decision of the Court to the President of the European Parliament and to the President of the Commission and shall notify it to the President of the Council.

The judges will be immune from prosecution unless other judges decide that they will lose their immunity, again a body deciding the rights of its members, with no oversight or accountability.

The judiciary will be responsible for accounting for themselves and if they don’t comply with the objectives of the Union (Federal State), they are liable to lose their pension. So what are the objectives of the Union how will they be defined in years to come? These are vague statements which we can only assume will be to the common good and the objectives of a fair society, which is a false sense of security.

We are entering into a totalitarian dictatorship, whether we pass this treaty or not. A No vote will give us time to wake more people up to what’s going on and give us the opportunity to change the course of history, but democracy can only be defended by vigilance, which means an end to mindless distractions. It will require a more critical and responsible population, educated in their Constitutional Rights and willing to defend them at every opportunity. Nothing can be taken for granted in the future and those that are handing us over to this dictatorship must be exposed and held to account, which our Constitution states the people are fully entitled to do.

[Sub-X]

Effect of EU Court Lavel Judgment on jobs and wages is being ignored
http://www.lisbonvote.com/
6/6/2008

PRESS RELEASE

Cóir has accused the government of intensifying their campaign to frighten and bully people into voting ˜Yes" on the Lisbon Treaty. Since the news of a rise in the ˜No" vote broke last night we've seen politicians rush to threaten voters; warning of a hypothetical economic crisis if Lisbon failed to pass,"� said spokesman Richard Greene. "There is no evidence to back these hysterical claims and we urge voters to resist this attempt to bully and browbeat the electorate."

However, Mr Greene pointed out that Lisbon could negatively impact on our economy, especially in regard to jobs and wages. "No-one has pointed out so far in the debate that the EU Court of Justice judgment in Lavel, which undermined the right a decent wage, was actually made in reference to the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Voting˜Yes" to Lisbon will make the Charter legally binding across all EU member states and means that a Lavel-type judgment will force Irish workers to take a cut in wages or see their jobs go elsewhere."

The European Court of Justice in Lavel made reference to the Charter of Fundamental Rights in its judgment and found that, while the charter gave the right to strike (collective bargaining in the charter), the right to free movement superseded that right. Therefore it found that the right of an employer to bring in cheap labour from abroad superseded the right to a decent wage.

The Cóir spokesman said that Ireland was facing a harsher economic climate and that the Irish government should have negotiated the Lisbon Treaty better in order to ensure that the right to a decent wage was protected from this attack. "We can see why IBEC are supporting this treaty,"� said Mr Greene. "They believe that increasing profits is more important than the right to earn a decent living, but our government has no right to subject Irish workers to the harmful effects of this treaty."

Cóir said that they would hold a press conference at Buswells Hotel on Monday, June 9th at 11am to discuss the impact of the Lavel judgment, and to give the result of their canvass tally with just three days to go until the vote.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fears as French to push for tax-rate harmony
http://www.lisbonvote.com/
Irish Independent
By Tom McEnaney, Business Editor
7/6/2008

Harmonisation of business taxes will be the number one priority of the French Presidency of the European Commission, which begins next month, officials from the French Department of Finance told business leaders.

A meeting of Medef, the largest French business lobby group, was told that Nicolas Sarkozy's government plans to bring forward concrete measures aimed at harmonising the European corporate tax base and, by extension, all tax rates, as early as September.

This would seem to undermine assurances given by Jose Barosso, the president of the European Commission, on a visit to Ireland last April when he said that Ireland's tax rates would not be threatened.

There is also evidence that the European Commission may be deliberately hiding plans to harmonise corporate tax rates until after Ireland goes to the polls on the Lisbon Treaty.

The Commission has consistently said plans to harmonise rates, by bringing in a common tax base for corporate taxes, are not very well advanced and will not threaten Ireland's low corporate tax regime, which is one of our key advantages in attracting inward investment. The plans will not be affected by the Lisbon Treaty, which, if passed, will allow us retain our veto on tax matters.

This has not prevented European tax harmonisation becoming one of the principal themes of the campaign. In particular it has been used by 'No' campaigners who have attempted to link the two issues, although many groups, including Irish business lobby groups, have stressed the two are unrelated.

The Irish Independent has seen copies of the agenda prepared for the July 2 meeting of the European Commission's 'Competitiveness Council'. It shows the plans have now developed to the point that Laszlo Kovacs, the EU Commissioner for Taxation and Customs Union, and the main driver of the tax harmonisation plans, was due to give a presentation on the subject to the Council.

A Commission spokesman confirmed that the item has been removed from the latest edition of the agenda. One source said it was specifically taken off because of sensitivities over the Irish poll on the treaty.

A spokesman for the Irish Government said: "If the Commission decides to bring forward a proposal to Council, then we will study it.

"The Government has made it crystal clear that corporation tax is an area of national competence and sovereignty and we will, working together with many other like-minded member states, vigorously oppose any proposal that seeks to change that."

A spokesman for Mr Barroso played down the role of the Commission in bringing forward the tax harmonisation plans.

"At the request of the member states the Commission is analysing the tax [harmonisation] issue. At this point there has been no conclusion to that analysis and there will be no decision any time soon."
Turlough O'Sullivan, director general of business lobby group IBEC, said: "I am absolutely convinced this is a Trojan horse to bring in common tax rates."

Ireland can veto the proposals, whether or not the Lisbon Treaty is passed by next Thursday's referendum. However, this would not stop some countries using the "enhanced cooperation" mechanism of the EU to club together to harmonise their own tax bases. Critics of the plan say Ireland would be then be pressurised to join this group.

[Sub-X]

Cowen must not yield to Yes blackmail
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/lisbon-treaty/cowen-must-not-yield-to-yes-blackmail-1402099.html
June 08 2008

Brian Cowen this weekend faces the humiliating prospect of losing the Lisbon Treaty, as he keeps an eye to the economic crisis tightening its grip on the country.
The Taoiseach is caught between a rock and a hard place. The rock is the Lisbon Treaty; the hard place is the looming recession — which some experts say is already here.

Last week, Mr Cowen gave into pressure from farmers to secure their backing in the vote. Now workers are threatening to withhold their support if the Taoiseach does not agree to their demands. Yesterday, however, Mr Cowen said he simply could not meet those demands.

If Mr Cowen were to give in this time — either now or during national pay talks — it could mean that thousands of jobs may go, mainly in US multi-national companies.

As a result of the Taoiseach’s stand, Siptu, which represents over 200,000 workers in Ireland, has said it cannot recommend a Yes vote. Trade unions represent less than 30 per cent of the workers in the private sector. Yet SIPTU wants the law to be changed so that employers are forced to deal with unions.

It is not just foreign companies who would be outraged: Ryanair, for example, would not appreciate being forced to deal with unions, nor would most employers. An employers’ source said: “It’s an attempted coup by Siptu. What they want — collective bargaining — would cost more jobs than tax harmonisation.

The Taoiseach must not give way to Yes blackmail.” Siptu’s position increases the possibility that the referendum on Thursday may well be defeated. However, a Sunday Independent/Quantum Research telephone poll shows that the outcome of the referendum is still very much in the balance. The poll was conducted among a nationwide sample of 500 people on Thursday night.

The referendum will be decided by the number of people yet to make up their minds which way to vote. Our poll found those intending to vote

Yes stands at 34 per cent: those intending to vote No is at 27 per cent; but the single largest grouping, at 35 per cent, are those who still do not know which way to vote with only four days to go.

The poll also reveals that “workers’ rights” is emerging as the biggest issue concerning those who intend to vote, with 21 per cent saying it will influence their decision. It seems possible now that the issue concerning Siptu — collective bargaining — may dominate the campaign in its final days.

It was easier for Mr Cowen to give in to to the demands of the IFA, who represent 85,000 farm families throughout the country. The IFA wrung a commitment from the Taoiseach to use the Government’s veto to prevent the World Trade Agreement adversely affecting their livelihoods. The economy is heading for crisis, however. Three leading economists have said the country is already in recession.

The Finance Minister, Brian Lenihan told the Sunday Independent this weekend that massive cuts in Government current spending were on the way: the economic situation in the country was now “dangerous”, he said. There is currently grave concern that the collapse in tax revenues could see Ireland breach EU borrowing limits. Mr Lenihan told the Sunday Independent: “Despite the shortfall in tax revenues this year, I still don’t think we will exceed our borrowing requirements.

However, what it does mean is that next year will be very tight and the current account discipline will be very tight next year,” he said.

“It is clear next year we are going to have to tighten, and be very disciplined in, our current expenditure. Simply, the operating costs of Ireland have to be paid for out of current tax revenues.” In this stark environment, the national pay talks will perhaps be the most critical ever. In fact, there is, for the first time in years, no certainty of a successful outcome.

Employers are already seeking a Yes vote in the Lisbon referendum while trade unionists, generally, are concerned about what they see as an “increasingly rightward” and “neo-liberal” direction in European public policy.

The Treaty is balanced by social provisions, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights, with an accompanying endorsement of an entitlement to collective bargaining.

Collective bargaining is the process whereby workers organise collectively and bargain with employers. In various national labour and employment law contexts, collective bargaining takes on a more specific legal meaning: in a broad sense, however, it is the coming together of workers to negotiate their terms of employment.

Siptu wants the Government to commit to the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and especially that on collective bargaining, which forces employers to recognise employee representatives.

Yesterday, while campaigning in Kerry, Mr Cowen said collective bargaining could only be dealt with in the context of social partnership. But he said he would do all he could to ensure the issue is dealt with satisfactorily. “This won’t be resolved before June 12. The best place for this to be discussed is in the context of social partnership,” he said.

In response, Siptu president, Jack O’Connor told the Sunday Independent: “We can’t move any more on this.

We would like to say ‘Yes’, but as long as this isn’t resolved, we can’t. If this is left to social partnership, this could be — and more than likely will be — vetoed by the employers. All we want is a guarantee now.”

Siptu has said it will only recommend support for the Treaty if the Government commits to legislate for an entitlement to the benefits of proper collective bargaining for workers in Ireland, which also prohibits discrimination against workers seeking to exercise it, which is enshrined as a fundamental right in the Treaty.

This would mean that workers in Ireland would have the benefit of one of the key “balancing” elements which will apply to virtually every other citizen in Europe if the Treaty is ratified.

However, Siptu says it is not prepared to support a “watered down” version which would expose workers in Ireland to the “free market” aspects of the Treaty while being denied the balancing protection of real collective bargaining.

[Sub-X]

Mad? I'm fuming at the lies they spin
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/mad-im-fuming-at-the-lies-they-spin-1401935.html
June 08 2008

In its editorial yesterday the Irish Times suggested that only a madman would vote No to the Lisbon Treaty. Are we out of our collective minds, it cried, for contemplating rejection? And then it told us why we should vote Yes: Lisbon will make Europe more efficient. The Irish Times was echoing the standard cry of the Yes campaigners: only loolahs, malcontents, hard-core lefties and religious loons would consider kicking Europe in the teeth, and they've all been anti-Europe from the very beginning. And it continued, too, the inherent contradictions of the campaign: the treaty is just a bit of administrative tidying up, but if we say No the sky will fall on our heads.

Garret FitzGerald carried on the theme, arguing that it would be really silly to annoy all those European politicians who have worked so hard to deliver this treaty. Europe, he explained, as if speaking very, very slowly to people with learning difficulties, is a complicated place and only people like him really understand how it works. If we don't scratch backs and network, those other Europeans will be very nasty to us and will punish us.

It is certainly true that the No campaign contains a number of loolahs and unpleasant people, but that does not make a No vote in itself mad. It is unusual and uncomfortable to be in the same camp as Sinn Fein, right-to-life bigots and assorted lefties, but that, too, is a cross that many of us will have to bear on Thursday.

The great and the good have lined up to tell us how crazy and irresponsible it would be to say No, and to a man and woman they have invoked history, implied that this is a referendum on our membership of the European Union and pleaded with us to just tug the forelock, accept that whatever comes out of Brussels is in our best interests, and ignore the small print.

The great and the good know what's best for us, and we should just trust them and move on.

Well I can't. I do not trust them. I cannot stand being patronised, threatened, bullied and lied to, all at the same time, especially when the people doing the bullying have not bothered to read and understand the very document that they are trying to ram down my throat.

That is reason enough to vote No, and it is why so many people have turned against the Lisbon Treaty in the past few weeks. We are being browbeaten, and we do not like it.

The timing, too, is unfortunate. When Brian Cowen became Taoiseach last month he announced that the most urgent and important task he faced was winning a Yes vote for the Lisbon Treaty. It was not.

His most urgent and important task was getting to grips with the crumbling Irish economy, not serving up the Irish people on a platter for his European peers.

But he chose Europe over Ireland and his government has been diverted from its real job ever since. Public sector reform? Let's appoint a task force and park those decisions until the autumn. Economy on the brink of recession? Never mind, there's a budget due next December and we'll worry about it then. Europe, not Ireland, is our most urgent and most important assignment.

And so Cowen has thrown himself into the Lisbon "debate", snarling at his political opponents for not pulling their weight and threatening his own parliamentary party with political exile if they dare to break ranks.

So desperate is he for a Yes vote that he bows down before the farmers' blackmail and now tells his TDs that they are personally responsible for delivering the vote in their constituency, or else. That sort of energy and commitment, if directed at something useful like the health service, might actually deliver results, but the full wrath of Brian Cowen is being directed instead at us.

That, however, is not a reason to vote No.

We might dislike Cowen's tactics and despair of his refusal to actually govern, but if Lisbon were an inherently good idea, we should park those reservations to one side and vote for it.

So is it any good? Its proponents claim it will make Europe more efficient, but do not tell us what that means, or whether that is a good thing.

Does efficient mean that the European Commission will no longer tolerate fraud? Will Europe's legion of parliamentarians account for the money they receive from the European taxpayers? Will whistleblowers be encouraged, or will they continue to be fired and victimised? No. Efficient means that Europe will be able to make more laws more smoothly, and fewer commissioners will sit around the table. It means that we will have a European president, chosen by the elite, not the people, and a European foreign minister, similarly untouched by popular democratic mandate.

We lose our European Commissioner for five out of every 15 years because, we are told, there just are not enough jobs to go around for 27 commissioners, and this from a government that employs 20 junior ministers.

Our voting strength decreases and Europe is allowed to exert far more control over our laws because many more areas are opened up to qualified majority voting (QMV), meaning that we can no longer veto laws that we do not want. Or, to use FitzGerald's argument, by losing the power of veto in so many areas, we lose a critical bargaining chip in all those cosy European negotiations. It was important to appease everyone when the veto was around, but with QMV the voice of small nations is quieted.

Not all of this is bad. There are areas of policy where Europe will deliver better law than our own legislators, and there are areas where we will benefit because one country can no longer veto a proposal that would have benefited us, but that is not the point. An increase in "efficiency" is not the same as an increase in democratic accountability and it certainly does not mean that Europe will start to spend its money wisely.

The Yes campaigners highlight the increased powers that will be enjoyed by the European Parliament and greater powers of scrutiny for national parliaments.

Neither proposal is reassuring. The European Parliament exists to create an impression of democracy, but is so large, so unwieldy and so lacking in real power that it is a sham. No Irish person, other than the immediate family of an MEP, could feel any connection with it.

Cowen tells us that Lisbon is as good as it gets, but I cannot accept that.

He tells us that our economy will be imperilled if we vote No, but that is nonsense (it is already in danger, and he is doing nothing about it). He claims that we will be turning our back on Europe and will suffer for it, but that, too, is nonsense. France, Holland, Sweden and Denmark all prosper within the Union and all have said No in the recent past to either a European treaty or the euro.

Voting No sends a message to Cowen and to Europe, and it is an important message for all politicians to digest.

Do not take us for granted, and do not treat us like fools. Next time -- and be assured, there will be a next time -- deliver a treaty that is readable, accessible and understandable.

Then explain why it is necessary, show what it will achieve and put it to the vote across Europe, and not just on this small island. That, more than anything, would convince me that a new treaty was worth voting for, because it would demonstrate that every European political leader was prepared to stand and be counted.

For now they hide, hoping that we can be arm-twisted into supporting something that they know many other European states would reject.

The only logical conclusion is to vote No, in the hope that this exercise in sham democracy gets roundly defeated on Thursday. Mad? I don't think so.

[dogmadestroyer]

I must admit that the prospect of a yes vote is almost as scary as that anti health freedom bill in Canada which via NAFTA/NAU could take most natural medicine and nutrition off the shelves. I don't live in the EU but I'll certainly be jumping up and down if the treaty is rejected. Watching this thread since its beginning is encouraging.