VOTE ‘NO’ to Lisbon Two!
“Ní hea, No, Nein, Non, Nyet, Nope, Not, No Means No …”
What part of that don’t they understand ?
On Thursday , 12th June 2008 , a vote was held in this State on the Lisbon Constitution/Treaty : for months beforehand we were repeatedly told by the political ‘establishment’ in Leinster House that that what we were being asked to vote on was “non-negotiable” , that we had to vote on it as it then stood , that it was legally impossible to have anything removed from it or inserted into it. Now that same political ‘establishment’ are asking us to believe that not only was it possible to change that Treaty , but that they had managed to do so to the “benefit” of this State’s position within the EU !
However – Czech prime minister Jan Fischer, who chaired a meeting on the supposed ‘new Irish Lisbon Treaty’ (as his country presently holds the EU presidency) was questioned (on Friday 19th June 2009) on these ‘Irish changes’ and dismissed them as nothing of the sort : “The protocol (“changes”) will clarify but not change either the content or the application of the treaty of Lisbon. It is an explanatory clarifying text which changes not a dot nor comma of the Lisbon Treaty.”
What has actually been ‘achieved’ by those idiots in Leinster House is a promise (“guarantee”) from the bigger political fatcats in Brussels that , at some time in the future, they might look at making a few amendments to the way the Lisbon Two Treaty affects this State! And Brian Cowan and his equally useless cabal of semi-political misfits were never going to get “changes to the Lisbon Treaty” due to the fact that Poland , Holland , Austria , Sweden and Britain used their combined ‘weight’ to ‘lean’ on Brussels , stating that if the Irish were to be offered a new Treaty then they , too , would expect the same offer to be made to them – so a compromise was agreed : Brussels would allow Cowan to claim that a “new Treaty” for the Irish was on offer but , at the same time , made it clear to Cowan that what they were offering was a promise that , if passed this time, they would perhaps – at some future date – take a look at the manner in which the Treaty affected this State. And please have no doubt that that is all that is on offer here – a promise from corrupt millionaire politicians in Brussels that they will , someday , give a curious glance over their well-padded shoulder at the way their tax laws are effecting finances in this State.
Don’t be fooled by them – VOTE NO TO LISBON 2 in October 2009 .
“The meeting and dinner heard how Ireland’s “intellectual mediocrity and lack of political courage” led to the rejection of the Lisbon treaty and included discussions of how to “cuddle and pamper” the Irish voter ahead of a new vote while at the same time “making pressures on them”.
(From here.)
This video gives an apt description of the type of morally and politically corrupt politician and system that are now demanding we vote ‘the right way’ on the already failed Lisbon Treaty. And this video shows what those bent career politicians stand to loose if we don’t vote the way they want us to . As Republican Sinn Féin have stated – “The decision to re-run the referendum on the rejected Lisbon Treaty in the 26-Counties next October represents an attempt to subvert the sovereign will of the people.All kinds of pressure is being applied to those allowed to vote to ensure that they arrive at the result Brian Cowen and the EU ‘élite’ demand…..”
(From here.)
Once again, this blog will be campaigning for a ‘NO’ vote on the Lisbon Treaty , for the same reasons : the “guarantees” which Brian Cowen has received have been given to him by similar unprincipled characters and , even if they were to be written in blood , would still be worthless . VOTE ‘NO!’ and help keep the lifts and corridors of the EU building free of more political rats , who scurry around trying to find the ‘Sign In’ book before they head back home to the political brothels they come from .
Sharon.
11sixtynine 
quote: If Ireland insists that the agreement made on 19 June is legally binding, there is only one way forward: to open the ratification process on the Lisbon Treaty again and have all 27 member states sign and ratify an amended Lisbon Treaty.
They cannot claim a legally binding victory and then avoid the necessary ratification together with the Lisbon Treaty. Under EU law a protocol is only legally binding when it is ratified by all member states. There is no third way. You cannot have your cake and eat it. Not-binding is still not identical with binding.
Lawyers will support this argument. For example, I have received the following comment from Mr Leolin Price CBE QC today: “The Lisbon Treaty is not yet in force. To be in force it requires ratification by all Member States. The Irish ‘No’ means that the present position in domestic UK law is that the Treaty is not yet operative and does not have any relevant legal status.”
You may alsowant to read the document from Open Europe ( http://openeurope.org.uk/research/irishguarantees.pdf ) of 19 June 2009 titled “Irish to vote on exactly the same text of Lisbon Treaty – EU admits that nothing has changed”
I have been involved in a number of debates surrounding the Lisbon Treaty, the latest of which can be found at http://boards.msn.com/UKNewsboards/thread.aspx?threadid=1146563
Good luck Ireland
Hi Phoenix One UK !
Thank You for taking the time to read and comment on our effort on this blog – much appreciated !
The political ‘elite’ in Leinster House have fully convinced themselves that words mean whatever they want them to mean , regardless of the true meaning of those words : they and their equally useless and freeloading political colleagues will do whatever it takes to secure their financial and political futures and will sell their souls to the highest bidder . They have no morals or bottom line – but unfortunately they have deep pockets and a compliant media to support them so , once again , we have a fight on our hands.
Thanks for those links – very interesting and very useful.
Hope to hear from you again , before this battle finishes.
Sharon.
Hi Sharon, I will of course drop by from timt-to-time, as we appear to share a common goal, the end of Lisbon treaty. In the mean time I trust you will not mind my quoting myself from another site:
President Klaus, the omega man, stands his ground on holding out on ratifying the Lisbon treaty. Brown stands his ground on refusing to call an early election or resign his position. This is a very curious position. If the Lisbon treaty is ratified by all member states prior to the assumed tory win at coming general election, then the UK people will be denied a Referendum. However, if President Klaus holds out long enough, then the UK people will get a Referendum. There is of course one other possibility. If the Irish again vote NO in their Referendum in October, the Lisbon treaty would be dead.
I wonder what the betting odds are?
Regards.
Hi again , Phoenix One UK !
Another good point you have raised there – unfortunately , the career politicians we speak of apparently use words to suit which ever brand of ‘snake oil’ they’re attempting to sell at that given time , and will say and declare the opposite in their next breath if need be – and they have a compliant media (due to advertising spend/licence reasons, perhaps?) who are not prepared to highlight the obvious hypocrisy involved. Please feel free to continue to visit and comment , and I hope you won’t mind if I use parts of your comment in a future piece on this up-coming Treaty vote?
Thanks!
Sharon.
Irish government delays report on spending cuts amid fears of Lisbon Treaty referendum backlash
The Irish Independent reports that ministers within the Irish government are unwilling to publish a new report on public spending cuts amid concerns it will scare voters ahead of the second Lisbon Treaty referendum. The report by the Expenditure Review Committee will set out options for €5bn worth of cuts to public spending and efficiencies in Government.
Taoiseach Brian Cowen and Finance Minister Brian Lenihan are still considering the issue of publication, amid differing views within the Cabinet. A leader in the paper notes that, “The rationale – if this absurdity can be distinguished by such a term – is that its bleak contents might frighten the voters, increase their discontent, and prompt them to vote ‘No’ in the second Lisbon referendum in the autumn”.
Hi Sharon. You probably already know of the above, but thought I should drop it in just in case. Regards.
Hi again , Phoenix One UK !
Well spotted !
And that’s so typical of the ‘calibre’ of the self-serving professional , career politicians we are cursed with here in this corrupt State. I hope they get the response they deserve on October 2nd next – a loud ‘NO!’ .
Looking forward to hearing from you again ,
Slán go fóill anois ,
Sharon.
Quote from Independant.ie,
Friday July 10 2009
Get the facts right on Lisbon
James Leahy (Letters, July 8), writing about the Lisbon Treaty, states: “Sovereignty remains with the member states.”
In the same edition, under the heading ‘Lisbon debate deserves facts not unfair fiction’, the Foreign Affairs Minister also states that we retain our sovereignty.
Can these gentlemen explain to your readers how they can make these statements when declaration 17 attached to the treaty clearly states, “The treaties and the law adopted by the union on the basis of the treaties have primacy over the laws of the member states”?
Frank Murphy
Strandhill Road, Sligo
Unquote.
Hi !
Now that is exactly the type of fact that the pro-‘Lisbon Two’ politicians would prefer that we didn’t know about ! It will be interesting to see how many more facts of that nature are exposed between now and October 2nd.
Thanks!
Sharon.
In a debate in the House of Lords UK Europe Minister Glenys Kinnock confirmed that Ireland would be voting on exactly the same text of the Treaty the second time around, saying that the Irish ‘guarantees’, “do not change the Lisbon treaty; the European Council conclusions are very clear on them. The Lisbon treaty, as debated and decided by our Parliament, will not be changed and, on the basis of these guarantees, Ireland will proceed to have a second referendum in October. Nothing in the treaty will change and nothing in the guarantees will change the treaty as your Lordships agreed it.” (Hansard, 1 July; Irish Times, 9 July)
McCreevy admits 95% of EU states would have voted No to Lisbon Treaty. EU Internal Markets Commissioner Charlie McCreevy has admitted that 95% of EU states would have voted No if they held a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. He said: “When Irish people rejected the Lisbon Treaty a year ago, the initial reaction ranged from shock to horror to temper to vexation. That would be the view of a lot of the people who live in the Brussels beltway. On the other hand, all of the [political leaders] know quite well that if the similar question was put to their electorate by a referendum the answer in 95 per cent of the countries would probably have been No as well.”
He also appeared to suggest that he still has not read the Lisbon Treaty. Asked if he had read it since admitting during the last campaign that he had not, he replied, “I am going to stay up every night during every day of the summer reading chapters. I will put questions to every journalist I meet asking them what different subsections mean. A lot of that is political nonsense.” (Belfast Telegraph, 26 June; Irish Times, Irish Independent, 27 June; Open Europe blog, EurActiv, Economist: Charlemagne blog, 29 June)
Hi again , Phoenix One UK !
Two quality posts there re ‘Lisbon Two’ and , most importantly , the sources are listed . Well spotted!
Thanks for the visit ,
Sharon.
Germans against bailing out Ireland, poll shows
ALISON SHEVLIN Irish Times – 20 July 2009
Some 70 per cent of Germans are opposed to bailing out Ireland from its current financial difficulties, according to a poll.
The Open Europe survey, conducted in collaboration with the Institute for Free Enterprise in Berlin, revealed the majority of Germans were against using public money to assist other countries that have got into financial difficulty.
Those surveyed were asked to pick which response closest described their view on the statement: “The German Federal Government has indicated that Germany would be prepared to financially support countries like Ireland “which have been hit quite hard by the banking crisis”.
While just under 25 per cent suuported the idea of German taxpayers’ money being spent on helping countries like Ireland or Greece, more than 70 per cent agreed were against it.
Open Europe director Lorraine Mullally said: “As the global recession limbers on, there’s been a lot of talk about the possibility of stronger EU member states bailing out the weaker ones, but until now no-one has asked what voters think.
She said: “Any plan to bail out EU countries depends on the willingness of German taxpayers to cough up — and this poll clearly shows they are not keen.”
“In particular, there have been suggestions that Ireland will somehow be offered a lifeline in this crisis, if only they show their appreciation of ‘Europe’ and vote in favour of the Lisbon Treaty. It’s important that Irish voters realise there is no appetite among German voters for such a rescue package, which will make it very difficult to achieve in practice.”
“To suggest otherwise is dishonest and very misleading.”
Wolfgang Muller from the Institute for Free Enterprise in Berlin said: “This poll confirms that German taxpayers are not willing to accept an ever increasing fiscal burden. At a time when Germany’s financial equalisation scheme between the federal government and the states is under increasing scrutiny, there is a need to reward the achievers and not to increase redistribution.
Mr Muller said: “Bailing Ireland out would send the wrong signals to governments in the EU. Any plan to try and “buy” Ireland’s Yes vote to the Lisbon treaty with talk of a bailout must be strongly rejected.”
A German bailout operation of other eurozone countries could cost the German taxpayer up to €1.5 billion euro per year.
LINK-
http://www.openeurope.org.uk/media-centre/article.aspx?newsid=2536
Hi Phoenix One UK !
Good to hear from you again – and Thank You for that post!
In this wee corner of Dublin Mid-West , we have distributed over two thousand ‘VOTE NO’ leaflets on a door-to-door basis and in pubs , clubs , hotels etc and we hope to hold a public meeting in the near future . Meanwhile , the leaflets , and the effect they are having in the area , is a good start .
Thanks for the visit ,
Sharon.
Hi Sharon, I don’t envy your leaflet distribution. Last time I did that was for the Referendum Party in 1997… droped over 10,000 in a week. Not much success then though, but as life would have it, the issues then have returned with people more open and responsive. Anyway, I have something for you:
How EU corruption, the euro and the Lisbon Treaty are putting the squeeze on EuropeDr Anthony Coughlan, one of the Republic of Ireland’s leading EU-critics, discussed the forthcoming EU summit on the Lisbon Treaty, the Lisbon II referendum in Ireland and the damage that the euro is having on the Irish economy. Edward Leigh MP, Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, spoke on fraud and corruption in the European Union [Thursday, 23rd July 2009]
Link –
http://www.brugesgroup.com/index.live
Regards and best of luck.
IMPACT to campaign for yes vote in Lisbon referendum
24/07/2009 – 15:46:49
The largest public sector union in the country has decided to campaign for a yes vote in the Lisbon Treaty referendum.
First the Irish government, then PM Brown meets for EU to give assurances that are not worth the paper they were written on, and now the largest public sector union gets in the act.
Sharon you and others like you look to have one hell of a hill to climb. The EU really want that yes vote and are pulling no punches.
Hi again !
For our leaflet drops we can usually count on at least ten kids (9-10 years young) who seem to love the job , and will make a game out of competing with each other . Afterwards , we buy the ‘winners’ (and the ‘losers’) a McDonalds or Burger King etc each. We have , thankfully , no shortage of helpers !
The Trade Union movement are , as expected , a disappointment : they are far too cosy with the politicians and are equally as ‘friendly’ with company owners and management . They have let us down too many times in the past and , whilst we still contact them , we have come to expect that they will , for the most part , turn their backs on us. As they have done this time. But , having more or less expected such a response , we planned our campaign as best we could without their input or support.
And we have indeed got a mountain to climb – but we are well used to that and will persevere to the best of our abilities.
Thanks for visiting , and for the link: much appreciated!
Sharon.
Hi Sharon,
No thanks required, after all, we are on the same side on this issue. The debates continue on MSN and numerous other sites. The sad thing is, it is Irland that is being made to suffer the most with our own Prime Minister the biggest threat and obstacle to overcoming total EU control.
We keep getting one particular visitor within one debate who is intent on trying to swing the Bitish to accepting EU integration with a UKIP member holding her own against him. What follows is one quote which he continually fails to answer and always avoids. Quote:
The founding father of the EU, Jean Monnet, said in April 1952:-
“EUROPE’S NATIONS SHOULD BE GUIDED TOWARDS THE SUPERSTATE WIHOUT THEIR PEOPLE UNDERSTANDING WHAT IS HAPPENING. THIS CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED BY SUCCESSIVE STEPS, EACH ONE DISGUISED AS HAVING AN ECONOMIC PURPOSE, BUT WHICH WILL EVENTUALLY AND IRREVERSIBLY LEAD TO FEDERATION.”
Unquote.
Sources of info and facts that might prove useful include “The Bruges Group”, “Open Europe”, and “State Watch”. All can be googled and contain further links that may be of help.
Regards.
Hi Sharon,
Just got the following which may interest you. Quote:
July 26, 2009 In Democratic Ireland ‘No’ Means NoAgainst EU chicaneries and mind controlby Dr Titine Kriesi, SwitzerlandIn June 2008, Ireland said ‘No’ to the Lisbon Treaty. Next autumn the Irish are to vote again. The EU functionaries’ attitude towards the Irish becomes obvious in their attempts to persuade them to change their mind. In doing so, they do not even refrain from manipulation, chicanery or tricks. As if the two million euro EU juggernaut propaganda, which rolls in Ireland with high-ranking EU commissioners’ lecturing, were not enough! (See Current Concerns No 6/2009) Now it is the Irish government that follows with a propaganda tour and squanders tax funds. In times of enormously rising unemployment rates, the majority’s opinion is to be manipulated with the hollow promise that a ‘Yes’ to the Lisbon Treaty would provide the country with assistance in times of a serious economic and financial crisis. The Irish should finally understand that if they changed their opinion, they would be better off… This time, citizens’ movements expect the campaign against the Irish ‘No’ to be even harder and dirtier.
The heads of state and governments of the EU refused to admit defeat concerning the result of the Irish vote. In order to make the majority change their minds, the most primitive manipulation methods and offenses were used, also on the part of EU Germany. The Irish were for example called “choleric” (by the Social Democratic Party of Germany, SPD); the German Ambassador warned of “terrible consequences” after a ‘No’ vote in autumn. Patricia McKenna, chairman of the Irish People’s Movement, says, “It is extremely arrogant of Germany to be putting pressure on Ireland to accept a treaty that they have not even ratified themselves, yet. Chancellor Merkel would be well advised to study the genuine concerns of her own citizens instead of trying to browbeat Ireland into voting again on something they have already rejected. ”1
Unquote.
the article ends with, quote:
What, if the Irish torpedoed the vote with a ‘No’ vote in autumn? This would mean an end to the Lisbon Treaty and Jochen Scholz, former lieutenant colonel of NATO Air Force, would be right that the “Lisbon Treaty a stillbirth”.8 If the EU wants to be democratic from the beginning, Ireland’s ‘No’ deserves attention and respect: No is no.
Unquote.
For full text link to-
http://www.currentconcerns.ch/index.php?id=796
Regards.
Hi Phoenix !
That Jean Monnet quote says it all – and they accuse those of us that are against the broad sweep of Brussels of being ‘deceitful’ !
Keep them coming , Phoenix – we will use the info you leave here to assist us in assembling more ‘VOTE NO’ leaflets : we have from now until early October next and will be in a position to use as much info as we can get!
Thanks again ,
Sharon.
Czech president refers Lisbon Treaty to court Vaclav Klaus, the Czech president, has threatened to derail attempts to see the controversial Lisbon Treaty take effect before the end of the year.
Meanwhile, one of the key figures in the pro-treaty campaign in Ireland has admitted that the “Yes” camp faces a “tough campaign” over the next two months.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/5913219/Czech-president-refers-Lisbon-Treaty-to-court.html
Anger reigns supreme, down on the farm
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Anger is surging through the Irish farming community.
Anger at falling prices for their produce, falling subsidies from the state and the EU and, now, further threats to programmes such as the Rural Environmental Protection Scheme (Reps), grants from which give support to so many struggling farms.
for full text link to-
http://www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=NEWS+FEATURES-qqqm=nav-qqqid=43373-qqqx=1.asp
In Germany, the Constitutional Court’s recent ruling on the Lisbon Treaty continues to reverberate with the CSU party, which is allied to Chancellor Angela Merkel’s CDU party, calling for an even greater say for the German parliament in EU decision-making than the Court envisions. The Court is demanding a new law to safeguard the role of the German parliament before the Lisbon Treaty can be ratified – which Merkel wants finalised before the Irish referendum. The CSU’s demands are causing headaches for the Chancellor ahead of a meeting between CSU and CDU representatives, due to be held on 21 August. (Welt, 16 July; Welt, 23 July)
Hi Sharon,
I need a holiday . Anyway, a short one for you and your readers. Quote:
However, Foreign Minister Micheál Martin this week made a misguided quip to a German newspaper, saying, in reference to the referendum, “democracies are complex”, adding, “would a dictatorship not be delightfully simple?” (FAZ, 21 July; Telegraph: Hannan blog, 22 July) Also referring to the Irish vote, EU Commissioner Joaquin Almunia told a Spanish newspaper that it is “not very democratic” to hold referendums on EU treaties. (Open Europe blog, 20 July)
Lisbon Treaty Will Force Abortion into Ireland through EU Charter of Human Rights
By Hilary White
DUBLIN, July 20, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – One of the Republic of Ireland’s leading pro-life lobby groups has warned Irish voters that a vote for the Lisbon Treaty will be a vote against the country’s constitutional protections for the unborn.
http://blog.echurchwebsites.org.uk/2009/07/20/lisbon-treaty-force-abortion-ireland-eu-charter-human-rights/
Hi Phoenix One UK !
Great posts on your part – the more info , the better.
Thanks!
Sharon.
Quote: A ‘Yes’ vote would ensure that Ireland would continue to attract foreign direct investment thereby increasing employment opportunities. Unquote.
One only has to only look at current trends or understand business practice to see this assumption is flawed. Businesses are in business to make profits, which includes covering costs of operations and labour. Provide a slave workforce on par with poor nations and you will indeed increase foreign investment. I further note the reference to attracting foreign investors. Why is there a lack of investment from within Ireland itself to promote its own future. Simple, they are using the labour of poorer nations to manufacture their products (slave labour). Is this the Ireland you want?
Quote: A ‘Yes’ vote would also mean that Ireland would continue to have access to many of the major EU programmes such as the European Social Fund and the Competition and Innovation Framework which provide support for workers and businesses adversely affected by the downturn. Unquote
If that is true, and given Ireland is a member state of EU, why is Ireland experiencing such financial difficulties?
Quote: A ‘Yes’ vote would mean that Irish banks would be in a good position to continue accessing liquidity from the European Central Bank. What would a ‘No’ vote achieve? Putting all of this at risk. Unquote.
Examine what you have said. Continue accessing liquidity from the “European Central Bank”? If not for the member states there would be no EU Central Bank. The EU is an organisation that relies on funds obtained from the 27 member states, it does not even possess a Federal reserve. Further, 70% of German citizens already made in quite clear they would not support bailing out poorer countries like Ireland, which means you are relying on that which does not exist.
Phoenix One UK
Swindon UK
The ECB flooded the euro zone banking system last month with a massive €442 billion of one-year money in a further attempt to boost lending to companies and consumers and support activity.
http://www.rte.ie/business/2009/0730/imf.html
The European Central Bank
The European Central Bank (ECB) was set up in 1998, under the Treaty on European Union, and it is based in Frankfurt (Germany). Its job is to manage the euro – the EU’s single currency, and to safeguard price stability for the more than two-thirds of the EU’s citizens who use the euro. The ECB is also responsible for framing and implementing the EU’s economic and monetary policy.
To carry out its role, the ECB works with the European System of Central Banks (ESCB), which covers all 27 EU countries. However, only 16 of these countries have so far adopted the euro. The 16 collectively make up the ‘euro area’ and their central banks, together with the European Central Bank, make up what is called the ‘Eurosystem’.
The ECB works in complete independence. Neither the ECB, the national central banks of the Eurosystem, nor any member of their decision-making bodies can ask for or accept instructions from any other body. The EU institutions and member state governments must respect this principle and must not seek to influence the ECB or the national central banks.
The ECB, working closely with the national central banks, prepares and implements the decisions taken by the Eurosystem’s decision-making bodies – the Governing Council, the Executive Board and the General Council.
Jean-Claude Trichet, from France, became President of the ECB in November 2003.
What does the Bank do?
One of the ECB’s main tasks is to maintain price stability in the euro area, so that the euro’s purchasing power is not eroded by inflation. The ECB aims to ensure that the year-on-year increase in consumer prices is less than, but close to, 2% over the medium term.
It does this in two ways:
First, by controlling the money supply. If the money supply is excessive compared to the supply of goods and services, inflation will result.
Second, by monitoring price trends and assessing the risk they pose to price stability in the euro area
Controlling the money supply involves, amongst other things, setting interest rates throughout the euro area. This is perhaps the Bank’s best-known activity.
How is the Bank’s work organised?
The European Central Bank’s work is organised via the following decision-making bodies.
The Executive Board
This comprises the President of the ECB, the Vice-President and four other members, all appointed by common agreement of the presidents or prime ministers of the euro area countries. The Executive Board members are appointed for a non-renewable term of eight years.
The Executive Board is responsible for implementing monetary policy, as defined by the Governing Council (see below), and for giving instructions to the national central banks. It also prepares the Governing Council meetings and is responsible for the day-to-day management of the ECB.
The Governing Council
The Governing Council is the European Central Bank’s highest decision-making body. It comprises the six members of the Executive Board and the governors of the 15 central banks of the euro zone. It is chaired by the President of the ECB. Its primary mission is to define the monetary policy of the euro zone, and, in particular, to fix the interest rates at which the commercial banks can obtain money from the Central Bank.
The General Council
The General Council is the ECB’s third decision-making body. It comprises the ECB’s President and the Vice-President and the governors of the national central banks of all 27 EU member states. The General Council contributes to the ECB’s advisory and coordination work and helps prepare for the future enlargement of the euro zone.
http://europa.eu/institutions/financial/ecb/index_en.htm
Eurozone jobless at 10-year high
Eurozone unemployment hit 9.4% in June – the highest in 10 years and another sign of the economic slowdown.
The number of jobless grew by 158,000 during the month, taking the total number of unemployed in the area using the euro to 14.9 million.
The figures came as separate data showed that inflation had declined more than expected in the eurozone in July.
Consumer prices in the 16-nation area fell a record 0.6% compared to a year earlier, according to Eurostat.
It was the second month in a row of falling prices following June’s decline of 0.1%.
EUROZONE JOBLESS
Lowest unemployment rate in the Netherlands: 3.3%
Highest unemployment rate in Spain: 18.1%
Overall eurozone youth unemployment (under 25s): 19.5%
Lowest youth jobless rate in the Netherland: 6.3%
Highest youth jobless rate in Spain: 36.5% and Lithuania: 31%
“That is the lowest inflation rate for the 16 countries sharing the euro in more than 50 years,” said economist Martin Van Vliet of ING.
He said it should provide “a stark reminder” to the European Central Bank that inflation may fall further in the medium-term.
‘Inflexible labour market’
As consumers lose their jobs and tighten their belts, this leads to lower spending. To attract customers, retailers have been cutting prices further.
The European Central Bank predicts that consumer prices will decline for a few months due to the comparison with record high oil and food costs a year earlier.
Eurostat has calculated that 3.17m people living in the eurozone have become unemployed since June 2008, when the unemployment rate was 7.5%.
Analyst Juergen Michels of Citigroup said: “We expect in the coming months to see further increases in unemployment and that is likely to have a negative effect on consumption.”
Spain was particularly badly hit with unemployment up 18.1% in June, and a youth unemployment rate of 36.5%.
Economist Jorg Radeke of the CEBR said the country was suffering from a “collapse in the construction sector and an inflexible labour market”.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/business/8178023.stm
Ireland commissioner says most EU countries would reject Lisbon Treaty Ireland’s EU Commissioner, Charlie McCreevy, has conceded that voters in most EU countries would reject the stalled Lisbon Treaty. By Martin Banks in Brussels
Published: 5:55PM BST 28 Jun 2009
His admission came as Brian Cowen, the Irsih prime minister, was set to announce 2 October as the date when Ireland holds its second referendum on the document.
The treaty, which proposes the first full-time President of the European Council, is highly contentious and was rejected by the Irish in a referendum in June last year.
But current opinion polls suggest the Irish will vote Yes this time.
However, Mr McCreevy, the internal market commissioner, said that if the treaty had been put to a public vote, it would have been rejected by 95 per cent of the 27 member states.
For full text link to-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ireland/5675481/Ireland-commissioner-says-most-EU-countries-would-reject-Lisbon-Treaty.html
The triumph of technocracy
Against the Lisbon Treaty [1 August 2009]
On 2 October 2009, Ireland will vote in its second referendum on the Treaty of Lisbon (also known as the Reform Treaty), which is set to change the workings of the European Union (EU). There is an idea abroad, especially in North America, that the European Union represents a progressive alternative to U.S.-sponsored neoliberalism. This argument can be found in numerous books and has even been echoed in numerous left-leaning journals. However, according to this expert in international relations and diplomacy, nothing could be further from the truth and he tells us why.
At the behest of the European Commission, the EU’s powerful unelected executive, member state governments are busy dismantling welfare states, enhancing their military forces, enacting illiberal political measures and neoliberal economic policies, and expressing undisguised contempt for anyone who disagrees with them. The dissenters include the peoples of France, the Netherlands, and Ireland, all of whom have had the nerve to vote against the neoliberal version of European integration.
The Irish, given a second chance to get the answer right in a referendum scheduled for October 2, are currently being subjected to a tidal wave of pro-Lisbon Treaty propaganda financed from their own taxes. Not a word of the treaty has been changed as a result of their rejection of it. According to the EU’s own rules, this refusal to amend the original should have killed the proposal. But the Commission has merely appended a number of non-legally binding interpretative declarations. The protocol containing these declarations openly states [1] that these declarations “will clarify but not change either the content or the application of the Treaty of Lisbon.” The people of France and the Netherlands have been given no second chance, though the Lisbon Treaty is almost identical to the European Constitutional Treaty they rejected at the ballot box, in the Dutch case by a landslide.
The EU’s much-vaunted successes are open to question, to say the least. Europe has indeed gone more than six decades without a major war, but whether or not this is a result of the European Union is impossible to say. A degree of economic integration, beginning in the 1950s with the European Coal and Steel Community, can almost certainly claim some of the credit. But building on the back of this integration a permanent, unquestionable, constitutionally established neoliberal economy is another matter. Like so many aspects of EU-style integration, the institutionalization of the misleadingly-named free market takes advantage of people’s natural desire for peace and prosperity to build what is rapidly becoming a capitalist dystopia.
For full text link to-
http://www.voltairenet.org/article161415.html
Shannonwatch calls for the rejection of the Lisbon Treaty national | anti-war | feature Thursday July 30, 2009 21:04 by Shannonwatch The abject disregard of the Irish political elite for Ireland’s neutrality has been demonstrated by the routine transit of US military planes and troops through Shannon Airport for most of this decade. With the re-run of the Lisbon Treaty referendum we are now being asked to accept EU promises that it will not affect or prejudice Ireland’s traditional policy of military neutrality. But the ongoing support of the Irish government for US-led NATO exercises around the world clearly shows that we cannot trust our leaders to uphold Irish neutrality, with or without the non-binding decisions that have been tagged onto the Treaty in an attempt to have it accepted by the people of Ireland.
Link-
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/93325
Ireland Report Offers Blueprint For Shrunken State
Oxford Analytica, 08.03.09, 06:00 AM EDT
Deficits set to spiral without brutal cuts.
Ireland is set to run the largest proportional budget deficit in the euro area in 2009, for the second year running . With the Central Bank not forecasting recovery until 2011, deficits are set to spiral without brutal cuts. A new specially commissioned report considers where they will come from, and in so doing provides a blueprint for other governments seeking to repair distressed finances.
For full text link to-
http://www.forbes.com/2009/07/31/ireland-mccarthy-lisbon-business-oxford-analytica.html
–Lisbon treaty. Ireland faces a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty on October 2. Until the McCarthy Report, public opinion surveys gave the “yes” campaign a majority. However, this report has generated hostility toward the incumbent coalition led by Brian Cowen, which may render the referendum a judgment on his government’s fiscal policy. Irish voters know that membership of the euro prevented the economy imploding entirely in 2008, but this gratitude now interacts even more with dislike for the government. To avoid an upset, “yes” campaigners will be careful as much as possible to separate themselves from Cowen.
The McCarthy report’s detailed review of how a state operates, what is justified in public service provision and what dramatic changes can be implemented to reduce public spending will serve as a marker for a new post-recession era in advanced democracies. However, its recommendations will only be passed at a high political cost to the present coalition.
Note: The above was extracted from article referred in previous post.
France boosts the Irish No campaign By Daniel Hannan Politics Last updated: April 9th, 2008
They just can’t help themselves, these Eurocrats. So removed are they from the voters that they are unable, literally unable, to see how their schemes look to people outside Brussels.
Irish Euro-enthusiasts are furious because the French have announced, in advance of their EU presidency, that they want to harmonise business taxes across the EU. Ireland’s Europe Minister, Dick Roche, called the French economy minister’s remarks “untimely, unhelpful and inappropriate”. Note his language: “untimely” rather than “untrue”. What he really means is: Why couldn’t that Frenchwoman keep her big gob shut until after our referendum?
Irish people understand that their country’s extraordinary growth during the 1990s was fuelled mainly by tax-cuts and not, as many European observers believe, by Brussels subsidies. They know, too, that the harmonisation of corporation tax is a long-standing EU goal: it was first cited 50 years ago in the Treaty of Rome. “You cannot have a single market without a single rate of corporation tax”, say Euro-integrationists , while simultaneously claiming that the single market is an unparalleled achievement.
For full text link to-
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/3676581/France_boosts_the_Irish_No_campaign/
Swedish MP: I don’t want to force abortion on IrelandPublished: 4 Aug 09 08:27 CET
Online: http://www.thelocal.se/21090/20090804/
Dictionary tool Double click on a word to get a translation
A prominent Swedish MP has insisted that she is not trying to use the European Union’s Lisbon Treaty to impose liberal abortion laws on Catholic countries like Ireland, which will vote on whether to accept the treaty in a referendum this autumn. She just wants a proper debate, she says.
Birgitta Ohlsson, chairwoman of the centre-right Liberal Party’s women’s movement, launched a petition last month calling for abortion to be legalised throughout the European Union. The petition, entitled ‘Make Noise for Free Choice’ is aimed at Ireland, Poland and Malta, all Catholic countries that ban pregnancy terminations.
“From a liberal perspective, the right to abortion is not just a Swedish or European issue, it’s a global issue,” Ohlsson said.
The petition calls on the European Union “to secure the right to free, safe and legal abortions and render it a human right.” It calls for the issue to be reclassified across the union as a human rights issue, rather than be dealt with as a health issue as at present.
Under the Lisbon Treaty, the European Commission must consider proposing Europe-wide legislation if one million signatures can be collected calling for action on a given issue.
The decision to link the abortion question to the treaty has alarmed some pro-Lisbon Irish politicians. Fianna Fáil MEP Brian Crowley told the Irish Times that supporters of the petition “either don’t know what is in the EU treaties or are engaging in publicity-seeking stupidity.”
Ireland has been issued additional guarantees by the European Council that the treaty will not be used to impose abortion laws.
But speaking to The Local on Monday, Ohlsson denied she wanted Europe-wide legislation:
“We are not pushing for a European law. We’re not seeking to change Irish law,” she said. If the target of one million signatures was reached, “the Commission would need to raise the issue, but they cannot force countries to do anything.”
The petition “is also a great opportunity to support activists in Malta, Ireland or Poland,” Ohlsson added.
At the time of writing, the petition had been signed by slightly more than 4,000
Link-
http://www.thelocal.se/21090/20090804/
Stop distorting Lisbon facts
Wednesday August 05 2009
Richard Ashton (Letters, August 4) claims to have read the Lisbon Treaty. If so, he has a problem either of understanding or of accurate communication.
Lisbon does not centralise power but enhances the roles of both the European Parliament and the national parliaments of the member states. Lisbon does not harmonise tax policies nor does it include special treatment for any member state and the legal guarantee given to Ireland makes this clear in emphatic terms.
Lisbon does not provide for amalgamation or closure of embassies but does include plans for an External Action Service to work with the member states in implementing external policies agreed at the council.
It is hard to see the reasoning or motivation behind this kind of misrepresentation of the text of the treaty.
Tony Brown
Raheny Dublin 5
Link-
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/letters/stop-distorting-lisbon-facts-1850948.html
‘As for the Irish vote, many of the pundits took the Irish people for granted last time and predicted the wrong outcome as a result.
‘Based on past experience the only prediction I will make some three months out is that the result in Ireland could still prove very close.’
Sarah Gaskell, analyst at Open Europe, a think tank which campaigns for reform of the EU, said: ‘It is completely unjustified that Irish voters are being asked to vote again on the very same Lisbon treaty that they rejected last year.
‘Despite assurances to respect the Irish no vote and the concerns of the Irish people, not a single comma in the treaty has changed.
‘Meanwhile, British voters have not been given a chance to have a say on this treaty, despite promises from all of the major parties in their last election manifestos to hold a referendum.
‘The so-called guarantees offered to Ireland are not legally binding in EU law and do nothing to address fundamental Irish concerns about the treaty, or the fact that it abolishes the national veto in more than 60 areas of policy and creates powerful institutions like the EU President and the EU foreign minister.’
Read more:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1198391/Irish-voters-second-chance-agree-European-Union-treaty.html#ixzz0NIpjCxQQ
Last Updated: Wednesday, August 5, 2009, 15:01 BCI clarifies Lisbon guidelinesThe Broadcasting Commission of Ireland said today broadcasters will no longer be required to give equal airtime to the opposing sides in the forthcoming Lisbon Treaty campaign.
Following the first Lisbon Treaty some broadcasters had complained they were “strait-jacketed” by the BCI rules.
Today’s BCI statement says there is “no requirement to allocate an absolute equality of airtime to opposing sides of the referendum debate during editorial coverage”.
However, it notes that the proportion of airtime allocated to opposing sides “must be fair to all interests and undertaken in a transparent manner”.
It also states the requirement to ensure the total time allocated to political party broadcasts “will result in equal airtime being afforded to parties that support the referendum proposals and those that oppose them”.
The vote on the Lisbon Treaty referendum will be held on October 2nd. The guidelines take effect from this Friday
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0805/breaking50.htm
Hi Sharon,
Have something for you that may or may not be on interest.
Euro-federalists financed by US spy chiefs By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in Brussels
Published: 12:00AM BST 19 Sep 2000
DECLASSIFIED American government documents show that the US intelligence community ran a campaign in the Fifties and Sixties to build momentum for a united Europe. It funded and directed the European federalist movement.
The documents confirm suspicions voiced at the time that America was working aggressively behind the scenes to push Britain into a European state. One memorandum, dated July 26, 1950, gives instructions for a campaign to promote a fully fledged European parliament. It is signed by Gen William J Donovan, head of the American wartime Office of Strategic Services, precursor of the CIA.
The documents were found by Joshua Paul, a researcher at Georgetown University in Washington. They include files released by the US National Archives. Washington’s main tool for shaping the European agenda was the American Committee for a United Europe, created in 1948. The chairman was Donovan, ostensibly a private lawyer by then.
The vice-chairman was Allen Dulles, the CIA director in the Fifties. The board included Walter Bedell Smith, the CIA’s first director, and a roster of ex-OSS figures and officials who moved in and out of the CIA. The documents show that ACUE financed the European Movement, the most important federalist organisation in the post-war years. In 1958, for example, it provided 53.5 per cent of the movement’s funds.
The European Youth Campaign, an arm of the European Movement, was wholly funded and controlled by Washington. The Belgian director, Baron Boel, received monthly payments into a special account. When the head of the European Movement, Polish-born Joseph Retinger, bridled at this degree of American control and tried to raise money in Europe, he was quickly reprimanded.
The leaders of the European Movement – Retinger, the visionary Robert Schuman and the former Belgian prime minister Paul-Henri Spaak – were all treated as hired hands by their American sponsors. The US role was handled as a covert operation. ACUE’s funding came from the Ford and Rockefeller foundations as well as business groups with close ties to the US government.
The head of the Ford Foundation, ex-OSS officer Paul Hoffman, doubled as head of ACUE in the late Fifties. The State Department also played a role. A memo from the European section, dated June 11, 1965, advises the vice-president of the European Economic Community, Robert Marjolin, to pursue monetary union by stealth.
It recommends suppressing debate until the point at which “adoption of such proposals would become virtually inescapable”.
Link:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/1356047/Euro-federalists-financed-by-US-spy-chiefs.html
Hi Sharon,
Internet disconnected. Compromising. I think I pissed someone off.
Hi Phoenix One UK !
And they’d have you believe that it’s only in China or North Korea etc that the State would attempt to deny internet access to its citizens!
The ‘No To Lisbon Two’ campaigners can expect a lot more of this as we get nearer the actual vote date : they intend to win by fair means or foul.
Keep in touch ,
Thanks!
Sharon.
A new report from Swedish think-tank Timbro has accused the EU of creating an illegitimate “propaganda machine”, and argued that the EU “at the tax-payers’ expense, actively advocates more European integration and prevents free debate on the future of Europe, extending the limits of what we normally regard as communication”. The report draws on research published by Open Europe at the end of last year, which showed that the EU is spending at least €2.4 billion a year on various efforts to ‘sell’ EU integration, including everything from straightforward advertising, to more subtle attempts to convince people of the merits of ‘ever closer union’ through cultural, educational and citizenship initiatives.
Last week EUobserver published an op-ed from Open Europe Director Lorraine Mullally, in which she argued that the European Commission increasingly “sees itself not just as ‘guardian of the Treaties’, but as a political campaign group.” She cited the recent interventions made by the Commission in the Irish debate on the Lisbon Treaty, as well as the attempt by the Commission Communications department to slander Open Europe in the Swedish media after the think-tank criticised EU communications policy.
The piece argues that “Without doubt, there is a clear need for citizens to become better educated about the European Union and what it does – especially given the fact that, as the European Parliament has confirmed, EU legislation is now at the root of the majority of laws enacted in its member states. But the European Commission – and no doubt far too many MEPs – still do not understand the difference between providing much-needed information and ‘selling’ the EU.”
International News also picked up Open Europe’s finding that, “The Commission has allocated from 2007 to 2013 the sum of €885 million on trans-continental efforts to promote a ‘common European identity’ among the under-25s in a campaign which deliberately confuses the difference between information and propaganda”. It said: “The Centre for European Policy Studies, a think tank which claims to be independent, was on the take through the Commission of some €6.1 million two years ago of taxpayers’ cash. Indeed, the Brussels undergrowth is thick with such bodies – all ‘thinking’, but who never seem to produce any monographs of intellectual distinction by comparison with their Washington counterparts. The difference is that such USA bodies are privately funded – not subsidised by the authorities they are supposed to be examining.”
link: http://euobserver.com/9/28509
PS: Hi Sharon, went mobile. Slower, but hey, I don’t mind.
Lisbon Treaty update: Tony Blair and Lord Patten to battle it out for top EU jobs
Former EU Commissioner and Conservative Party Chairman Lord Patten has said that he would be “very positive” about the idea of becoming Europe’s first Foreign Minister, a position which would be created if the Lisbon Treaty comes into force. This follows Europe Minister Glenys Kinnock’s admission that the Government is backing Tony Blair for the position of EU President. (FT FT: Leader Mail, 5 August)
It is unlikely that two Britons would get both jobs, and if the Treaty comes into force, EU leaders are expected to begin horse-trading over the positions in the autumn. However, Tony Blair’s support of the war in Iraq could undermine his chances, as well as smaller countries’ fears that a powerful EU President could reduce their own voice in Europe. A new YouGov poll this week has found that 54 percent of UK voters are opposed to Blair becoming EU President. (Sunday Times YouGov poll, 3 August; FT, 6 August)
Meanwhile, Alexandr Vondra, the former Czech Deputy Prime Minister, has accused France and the EU establishment of undermining the Czech EU Presidency, which took place in the first half of 2009, in order to prove that small countries are not up to the job of representing the EU, and that a strong EU President is needed. He said, “We were under fire from the start. The ayatollahs of the Lisbon Treaty in Brussels and Paris wanted us to fail in order to prove their argument that the rotating EU presidency didn’t work and that the EU couldn’t function without a new treaty.” (IHT, 4 August)
Czech President Vaclav Klaus, who has so far refused to sign the Treaty, has said he plans to refer it to the Czech Constitutional Court at the start of August, while in Germany there has been little progress on finding a compromise on the new law required by the Constitutional Court to ratify the Treaty. (Telegraph, 27 July; Handelsblatt, 4 August)
In Ireland, the Broadcasting Commission has said that commercial radio and television stations will not have to give equal airtime to opposing sides in debates on the Lisbon Treaty during the campaign, ahead of the referendum on 2 October. ‘Yes’ campaign group ‘Generation Yes’ has welcomed the announcement. (Irish Times, 6 August)
Please leave your comments on our blog:
link:
http://openeuropeblog.blogspot.com/2009/08/whats-in-name.html
Brussels burns billions of Euros on publicity – but citizens still can’t stand the EU Thursday, 30 July 2009 03:58
International News Services sources:
By David Haworth, in Brussels
The European Commission and the European Parliament are beginning to feel the rough edge of voter sentiment about them.
Neither institution is well regarded – and becoming less so all the time.
Of course European Union (EU) officials say nothing about the tsunami of complaint, criticism and contempt that the speed of emails exposes them to.
But the email blowback from voters is uncomfortably there.
One such bureaucrat “victim” commented on how informed and specific the abuse was. Personal even.
Print journalists use to say this kind of contact was from the “green ink brigade” because that was the colour of choice many critics used.
Although the delete button stands in for a waste paper basket these days, a public body finds it more difficult not to reply to unwanted correspondence.
The idea of direct contact with the institutions was boosted by a poll four years ago which asked voters whether they thought the European Parliament should conduct all its business in Brussels rather than splitting it extravagantly between the Belgian capital and Strasbourg, hundreds of miles away on France’s German border at an annual cost of Euros 204 million.
Under the EU’s citizen petition system the authorities are supposed to take notice if more than a million votes are cast. In this case the target was handsomely achieved.
Needless to say, both the parliament and EU member states ignored it. They didn’t even make the effort to acknowledge the campaign result.
This is one example, perhaps even a small one, of the increasing dislocation between the rulers and the ruled in the European Union.
It’s interesting for two background reasons:
First, the voter turnout in the recent European Parliament elections at 34% a record low, highlighting the fact that fewer citizens participated every time an election was held in the past 30 years. So the wished-for endorsement of the EU establishment, even during a period of acute economic crisis, didn’t matererialise.
In the second place, it’s overlooked that the European Commission spends many many millions of Euros per annum in propaganda to convince the public that “ever closer union” is not only vital but also, perhaps, inevitable.
There’s seemingly no limit to the funds dispensed to television, radio, publications of all kinds, campaigns, think tanks and other pressure groups to make everyone, from school kids to pensioners, cheerleaders for the European Union.
According to the Open Europe think tank’s research the EU spends an astonishing annual Euro2.4 billion promoting itself through many and devious ways.
Some Euro 213 million is to be spent by the Commission’s directorate general for communications this year but that only tells a part of the story because all the other Commission departments have their own publicity budgets which are not included in this sum.
The Commission has allocated from 2007 to 2013 the sum of Euro 885 million on trans-continental efforts to promote a “common European identity” among the under-25s in a campaign which deliberately confuses the difference between information and propaganda.
In response Commission vice president Margot Wallstrom says: “The goal is not to get everyone to love the EU” but rather to create better policies if the EU first consults the public.
The Centre for European Policy Studies, a think tank which claims to be independent, was on the take through the Commission of some Euro 6.1 million two years ago of taxpayers’ cash. Indeed, the Brussels undergrowth is thick with such bodies – all “thinking”, but who never seem to produce any monographs of intellectual distinction by comparison with their Washington counterparts. The difference is that such USA bodies are privately funded – not subsidised by the authorities they are supposed to be examining.
The Euronews TV service? Good stuff, but it will cost voters Euro 10.8 million his year to learn from it how excellently the EU is looking after their interests.
Of course, the speed and ubiquity of electronic communication will make only the slowest changes to the way the EU conducts itself – if at all.
But the paradox remains: the more multi-millions the European Union spends telling voters how splendid it is, the faster the two finger salute from those paying for it.
Link:
http://www.internationalnewsservices.com/articles/1-latest-news/12296-brussels-burns-billions-of-euros-on-publicity-but-citizens-still-cant-stand-the-eu
UKIP video response to Respect the Irish Vote: Aftershock in European Parliament.
Part 1:
Part 2:
Nigel Farage MEP pt.2 The State of the EU & The Undemocratic Treaty of Lisbon – RedIceRadio
Part 3:
Nigel Farage MEP pt.3 The State of the EU & The Undemocratic Treaty of Lisbon – RedIceRadio
LISBON
Posted: Aug 08, 2009
Vote No To Lisbon raft launched
This Morning, Saturday the 8th August at 7am, Irish Friends of Palestine Against Lisbon (IFPAL) launched the Vote No To Lisbon raft on the River Liffey In Dublin City Centre.
Irish Friends of Palestine Against Lisbon are calling for Irish voters to oppose the Lisbon Treaty in the forthcoming re-run of the Lisbon Treaty Referendum, a referendum that is exactly the same as the one they have rejected already. VOTE NO to Lisbon on OCTOBER 2nd.
•EU foreign policy has damaged the human and political rights of the Palestinian people by giving Israel financial and political support regardless of its gross human rights violations in breach of numerous statutes of international humanitarian law and the EU-Israel Trade Agreement
•EU foreign policy has emboldened Israel which continues its policies of murder, ethnic cleansing, illegal detention, home demolition, land and water theft, construction of the illegal apartheid wall, torture, genocide and apartheid without fear of sanction from the EU.
•It would pivot Ireland from its present status as an independent sovereign country to that of a minor subordinate in a newly constituted European superstate
•It would allow the EU Council to change the manner in which EU Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) is decided from unanimity to qualified majority vote thus removing Ireland’s veto.
•Ireland would be obliged to uphold the CFSP even if we disagree with the policy
•Ireland would lose its sovereign right to espouse an independent foreign policy, even in the United Nations where a new EU foreign minister, as proposed by the Lisbon Treaty, would represent all EU member states
•EU foreign policy is decided behind closed doors away form public scrutiny and is manipulated by a well funded Zionist lobby embedded in the political architecture of the larger states that dominate and control EU foreign policy.
Vote No to Lisbon – protect human rights and democracy!
Link:
http://www.swp.ie/index.php?page=300&dept=News
Summary of 13 things the Lisbon Treaty would do!
By Simon Murphy, August 5, 2009 3:29 AM
Dear Friends,
Below for your information is a summary of 13 important things the Lisbon Treaty would do if it were to come into force, as well as a longer document which explains these points more fully.
These have been prepared with the help of authorities on Irish constitutional and European law, and you can take it that the facts they give on the Treaty and its consequences are accurate.
The Irish people will reject this proposed EU Constitution again in the Lisbon Two referendum in October if they are made aware of what is in it.
Lisbon’s proposal to give the Big States from 50-100% more voting power in making EU laws, while halving Ireland’s voting power to 0.8%, would be economically disastrous for us in face of the economic crisis, as Brussels, Frankfurt and the Big EU States insist on savage cut-backs being imposed on the Irish economy.
That is why the most urgent task for those of us who want to defend Irish democracy, national independence and our ability to defend our economic interests in face of Lisbon is to take the initiative in adapting the information below and spreading it to our friends and neighbours between now and September, when the big guns of the Government and Yes-side will get going. Maybe you and your friends and colleagues could set up a small canvassing team and use this material – not in two months time, but this week and next week and the week after that – to get the facts about Lisbon to the people in your area by going to see them and talking to them on their doorsteps? These facts can also be used in letters to the national and local press.
If you want to hold local meetings to get such canvassing groups going, please contact whichever of the various No-to-Lisbon bodies is closestto your views, or else contact us, which will try to provide a speaker service to the best of our ability.
Yours faithfully
Anthony Coughlan
Director
(President, Foundation for EU Democracy, Brussels)
To read more link to-
http://www.truthcoalitionireland.org/?page_id=326
1. Would be a power-grab by the Big States for control of the EU by basing EU law-making after Lisbon primarily on population size. At present EU laws are made by a majority of States(14 or more), as long as they have between them 255 weighted votes out of 345. Under this system the Big States have 29 votes each and Ireland has 7. Under the Lisbon Treaty EU laws would be made by a majority of States(15 or more), as long as they have 65% of the total EU population between them. This change would double Germany’s voting power in making European laws from its present 8% to 17%, increase Britain’s, France’s and Italy’s from 8% to 12% each, and halve Ireland’s vote to 0.8%. How does reducing our vote in EU law-making to 0.8% put Ireland “at the heart of Europe” ? Or induce the other EU Member States to listen to our concerns on unemployment and help resolve the economic crisis in the interest of Irish companies, workers and farmers?
2. Would copperfasten the Laval and related judgements of the EU Court of Justice, which put the competition rules of the EU market above the right of trade unions to enforce pay standards higher than the minimum for migrant workers. At the same time Lisbon gives the EU full control of immigration policy(Art.79 TFEU).
3. Would permit the post-Lisbon EU to impose its own EU-wide taxes directly on us for the first time in order to raise its own resources for the EU itself, without the need of further Treaties or referendums(Art.311 TFEU).
4. Would amend the existing treaties to give the EU exclusive power as regards rules on foreign direct investment(Arts.206-7 TFEU) and give the EU Court of Justice the power to order the harmonisation of national indirect taxes if it judges that these cause a “distortion of competition” in the market (Art.113 TFEU). These steps would threaten our 12.5% corporation profits tax, which is the principal attraction of Ireland for foreign business.
5. Would abolish the European Community which Ireland joined in 1973 and replace it with a legally new European Union in the constitutional form of a Federal EU State (Art.1 TEU). This post-Lisbon EU would for the first time be legally separate from and superior to its 27 Member States and would sign international treaties with other States in all areas of its powers (Arts.1 and 47 TEU; Declaration 17 concerning Primacy). In constitutional terms Lisbon would thereby turn Ireland into a regional or provincial state within this new Federal-style European Union, with the EU’s Constitution and laws having legal primacy over the Irish Constitution and laws in any cases of conflict between the two. Ireland would thus formally cease to be a sovereign independent State in its own right in the international community of States and be like a provincial state in an EU Federation.
6. Would turn us into real citizens of the constitutionally Federal post-Lisbon European Union, owing obedience to its laws and loyalty to its authority over and above our obedience and loyalty to Ireland and the Irish Constitution and laws in the event of any conflict between the two. One can only be a citizen of a State. The Irish people were not that happy when they were citizens of the UK State. Although as citizens of the post-Lisbon Federal EU we would still keep our Irish citizenship, this would be subordinate to our EU citizenship and to the rights and duties attaching to that in any case of conflict between the two (Art.9 TEU).
7. Would give the EU Court of Justice the power to decide our rights by making the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights legally binding for the first time (Art.6 TEU). This would give power to the EU judges to lay down a uniform standard of rights for the 500 million citizens of the post-Lisbon Union in the name of their common EU citizenship in the years to come. It would open the possibility of clashes with national human rights standards in sensitive areas where Member States differ from one another at present, e.g. property and inheritance rights, trial by jury, habeas corpus, legalising hard drugs, euthanasia, abortion, labour law, succession law, marriage law, children’s rights etc. Ireland’s Supreme Court and the Strasbourg Court of Human Rights would no longer have the final say on what our rights are.
8. Would abolish the national veto Ireland has at present in 32 new policy areas by handing over to the EU the power to make laws binding on us as regards public services, crime, justice, policing, immigration, energy, transport, tourism, sport, culture, public health, the EU budget, international moves on climate change etc.
9. Would reduce the power of National Parliaments to make laws in relation to 49 policy areas or matters by shifting their powers to the EU, and increase the influence of the European Parliament in making EU laws in 19 new areas (See euabc.eu for the two lists).
10. Would be a self-amending Treaty which would permit the EU Prime Ministers and Presidents to shift most remaining EU policy areas where unanimity is required and a national veto still exists – for example on tax harmonisation – to qualified majority voting on the EU Council of Ministers, without need of further EU Treaties or referendums(Art.48 TEU).
11. Would abolish our present right to “propose” and decide who Ireland’s Commissioner is, by replacing it with a right to make “suggestions” only, leaving it up to the incoming Commission President to decide (Art.17.7 TEU). The EU Prime Ministers have promised each State a permanent Commissioner, but what is the point of us continuing to have an Irish Commissioner post-Lisbon when the Irish Government can no longer decide who that Commissioner would be?
12. Would enable the 27 EU Prime Ministers to appoint an EU President for up to five years without allowing voters any say as to who he or she would be, thereby abolishing the present six-month rotating EU presidencies (Art.15 TEU).
13. Would militarize the EU further, requiring Member States “progressively to improve their military capabilities”(Art.42.3 TEU) and to aid and assist other Member States experiencing armed attack “by all the means in their power” (Art.42.7 TEU).
_______
TEU = Treaty on European Union as amended by the Lisbon Treaty; TFEU= Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union as amended by the Lisbon Treaty. These two Treaties together would become the Constitution of the new post-Lisbon European Union.
For more detailed information see nationalplatform.org and euabc.eu
Ireland – second round and further tricks
However, the Lisbon Treaty is not prevented by this verdict in Germany. Therefore, everything is now depending on Ireland, where a new referendum will be held on October 2nd , because in the past the Irish people were so recalcitrant to clearly say “No” to the treaty.
At the EU summit in June, a declaration called “additional protocol” was passed. To become effective, this declaration has to be ratified by all EU member states. It is planned that the EU member states will sign this declaration e.g. on the occasion of Croatia’s accession to the EU with subsequent ratification by the national parliaments. This declaration contains three items: Fiscal policy, legislation on abortion and military policy. The goal is to pacify at least some of those who voted against the Lisbon Treaty in the past, hoping to gain a majority for a Yes during the second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty in Ireland on October 2nd .
Of particular interest is the section about “Security and Defence”. It is alleged that Ireland’s neutrality will not be affected. But this is not correct: The collaboration between the EU and the NATO remains a significant element of the Lisbon Treaty.
A number of affirmative references are made regarding NATO. Protocol No. 10 states: “CONVINCED that a more assertive Union role in security and defence matters will contribute to the vitality of a renewed Atlantic Alliance, in accordance with the Berlin Plus arrangements…”
This is an open violation of the Irish neutrality.
The additional protocol will not change the fact that the Lisbon Treaty would convert the EU into a military union. All military elements of the treaty are going to persist: the military “solidarity clause” (article 222) – more rigid than the solidarity clause of the NATO – converts the EU into a military alliance and enables the use of military forces inside the EU. Article 42 obliges the member states to a build-up of arms. The “Permanent Structured Cooperation” makes a militarized “Core Europe” possible: Only those countries will decide about military deployments which participate in them. For the first time the EU budget can be used for military purposes using the “Start-up Fund”. Until now this is prohibited by the EU treaties. For the first time, the Lisbon Treaty would anchor EU Battle Groups and the Armament Agency by primary law, i.e. to abolishthem again, a new EU treaty would be necessary.
The so called “additional protocol” affirms the correctness of our critique of the military consequences of the Lisbon Treaty. Now, using trickery, it is intended to finally push through the Lisbon Treaty. The Irish people voted with a clear “No”. Now they are supposed to vote time and again until self-proclaimed EU elite is satisfied with the the result . The “concessions” of the new “additional protocol” are cosmetics without any obligations.
Representatives of the progressive Irish No-campaign have asked to make use of the second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty in Ireland as quasi an EU-wide ballot. They asked for support from progressive NO-activists of other EU countries. We will comply with this request. We will struggle for a victory of the “NO” to this neoliberal and militaristic Lisbon Treaty during the second referendum in Ireland too. No means No! [Tobias Pflueger ]
http://womblog.de/2009/08/09/verdict-of-the-german-constitutional-court-concerning-the-lisbon-treaty-court-strenghtens-parliamentery-prerogative/
Gordon Brown & Europe stitch-up Irish on Lisbon Treaty (23.Jun.09)
Gordon Brown gleefully reports how the traitor European leaders have stitched up the Irish and the Lisbon CONstitution / Treaty. Giving the Irish worthless guarantees, the treaty “will not need to be renegotiated” – because these clauses will no be inserted in the CONstitution.
The Irish have been had by the traitor European leaders and their own government, the voters MUST vote out the CONstitution once and for all.
Recorded from Sky News, 23 June 2009.
Link:
Lisbon Treaty has grave implications for democracy
August 11, 2009 12:06 |by Brian Denny
On October 2 Irish voters are being forced to vote again on the Lisbon Treaty in one of the most cynical exercises ever carried out by the European Union. Ireland is being bullied into voting for a second time on exactly the same treaty because it had the temerity to reject it last June.
Yet, while Ireland gets two referendums, no other country is being allowed to vote at all. Even Ireland’s EU commissioner Charlie McCreevy accepted that if the treaty had been put to a public vote, it would have been rejected by 95 per cent of member states.
The recent summit that supposedly gave Ireland certain “guarantees” was a carefully orchestrated charade and its declarations on workers’ rights and collective bargaining will not be legally binding. Moreover, under the revised treaty, the European Court of Justice would be even more powerful and able to make further draconian rulings on trade-union rights over and above those already decided against collective bargaining, the right to strike and the right to work. This court only exists to put in place EU rules and the internal (neoliberal) market and place everything in the hands of big capital, so Irish workers will not escape its rulings and case law.
In short, without any mandate to do so, the European Union is seeking to create a super state with one government in Brussels. The Council of Ministers would be turned into that government. Those ministers would then be responsible to the EU and not be answerable to their elected parliaments. Currently about 80 per cent of legislation which is put in place in Britain emanates from Brussels, along with key common policies and directives.
Yet the EU is having trouble pulling off this slow-motion coup d’etat without exposing its anti-democratic logic. French and Dutch voters rejected the original EU Constitution and, according to EU and international law, if only one member state does not ratify the Treaty it becomes null and void.
The revamped version, the Lisbon Treaty, should also have been dead and buried after the first Irish referendum. Now the EU is attempting to pull off the same trick used when Denmark rejected the Maastricht Treaty in 1992. Special opt-outs were devised to win over the Danish electorate and the ruse worked. But the opt-outs have come to nothing beyond Denmark remaining outside the euro-zone.
Three other member states have also not yet ratified the Lisbon Treaty: Germany, the Czech Republic and Poland. In a serious blow to German ratification, the country’s Constitutional Court has decided that the Lisbon Treaty is incompatible with the sovereignty of the German state and new laws and safeguards are required before ratification. Acting on a complaint registered by 50 deputies from across the political spectrum, including the left-wing party Die Linke, the court found that the neo-liberal charter contravened a number of national laws and matters to do with transport.
A general election is due to take place in September and German elites are in a desperate scramble to bend German law to meet the demands laid out in the treaty before parliament is dissolved. At the same time a recent poll revealed that over 80 per cent of Germans want a referendum on Lisbon. The court ruling also raises serious questions about the role of national parliaments within the Lisbon Treaty and whether similar democratic safeguards should not be required for all member states.
Czech President Vasclav Klaus, who has vowed not to sign the treaty until after an Irish Yes vote, has argued that the demands by the German court have not corrected the shortcomings of the Lisbon Treaty.
“I don’t believe it’s possible to eliminate the well-known faults of the Treaty of Lisbon by means of an accompanying law. It would be too easy,” Mr Klaus declared, adding: “It’s not by chance that they propose resolving the contradictions between the treaty and the constitution by changing the country’s legislation and not the treaty.”
Mr Klaus has also indicated that he would wait for a decision in Britain if a referendum were held as promised by all three major parties in the House of Commons.
Poland’s President Lech Kaczynski has already signed the Bill allowing him to ratify Lisbon but has not signed the actual instrument of ratification and says that it is pointless to do so until the people of Ireland have voted on the treaty.
Ultimately, the Irish government has failed to stand by the verdict of the Irish electorate and instead promised the EU that it will win a second referendum.
The democratic and EU-critical movement in Britain has to make clear that we too are opposed to the Lisbon Treaty to show the Irish electorate that they are not alone. Taking such a stance will also assist the Polish and Czech presidents in finding reasons for not signing off the treaty.
In the run-up to the general election in Britain we have to press the Labour, Conservative and Liberal-Democrat parties to carry out their promises to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.
The labour and trade union movement has been alerted to the implications of the “free movement of capital, services, goods and labour” within the EU and the “race to the bottom” it creates in terms of wages and conditions.
This must be extended to an understanding that there are grave implications for all forms of democracy if we become enslaved by a treaty that, in the words of McCreevy, 95 per cent of Europeans do not want.
Brian Denny is secretary of Trade Unionists Against the EU Constitution. This article first appeared in the Morning Star.
Lisbon pledges are unconvincing
Wednesday August 12 2009
Pauline Byrne (Letters, Irish Independent, August 6) assures us that Ireland’s control over key aspects of its social, military and economic affairs will be unaffected by the Lisbon Treaty based on legal guarantees which will be attached to the EU treaties at the time of the next accession treaty.
In other words, these guarantees are not a concrete reality but a mere promise which may or may not be fulfilled.
If this treaty were really different from that rejected by the Irish people last June, wouldn’t it be reasonable to expect that the proposed changes would be included, either in the wording of the proposed amendment being offered to the electorate next October, or in the text of the treaty itself?
Ms Byrne also seems to believe that EU protocol is inviolable. However, if Lisbon is passed, the European Court of Justice will have the power to decide our rights by making the EU Charter of Human Rights legally binding for the first time. (Art6 TEU).
This gives power to EU judges to lay down a uniform standard of rights for all EU citizens, opening up the possibility of clashes with national human rights standards in sensitive areas such as abortion or corporation tax, where member states differ from each other. Ireland’s Supreme Court would be eclipsed and no longer have the final say on what our rights are. Fidelma Macken, an Irish member of the European Court of Justice, has acknowledged that it would be foolish to argue that the Charter of Human rights will not affect Irish law.
As journalist James Downey wrote in the Irish Independent on March 21: “The anti-Lisbon people are right about one thing. Any guarantees we may get on their concerns will be irrelevant, or worthless, or both.”
James Hogan
Thurles
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/letters/lisbon-pledges–are-unconvincing-1857037.html
Thursday, August 13, 2009 Let us support democracy and reject EU superstate
The EU political elite supports the treaty because it continues to transfer power away from the people and their own national democratic institutions to themselves and their institutions, the Council of Ministers, the European Court of Justice and the parliament. The German court decision has stopped the elite in their tracks and driven yet another stake through its heart. The second No vote in Ireland will complete the job.
For complete text link to-
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0813/1224252480489.html
Originally Posted by fishnewseu
Thursday, 13 August 2009 12:05
AN initial meeting of officials of both the Irish Fishermen’s Organisation (IFO) and The Fishermen’s Association Ltd (FAL) has been held in Dublin. This followed discussions on the possibility of an alliance between the organisations, given what they describe as areas of mutual interest and opposition to the EU policy of equal access to fisheries resources.
The meeting agreed that the immediate objective would be to support the IFO in their campaign to secure a “no” vote in the second Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty on October 2.
As part of that campaign “like-minded” French and Danish fishing organisations will be invited to meet the IFO and FAL in Dublin in the next few weeks.
The IFO and FAL say in a joint press statement that the Lisbon Treaty sets out reforms “intended to streamline EU decision making” and needs the approval of all 27 member states to become effective.
But in reality, they contend, it gives the EU a blank cheque as it will be self amending. The new Article 308 will allow more expansions in EU power without national parliaments and electorates having to agree to further transfers.
The EU under Article 46 A (Legal Personality) will, they claim, expand upon the EU’s ability to sign international agreements that will be binding upon the member states. This will in effect make the European Union a state.
“It is of particular interest to the fishing industries of the EU as it will reaffirm and enshrine that the EU shall have exclusive competence over the conservation of marine biological resources under the Common Fisheries Policy. The final piece of the jigsaw will be put in place to achieve a single EU fleet operating in EU and third country waters under the direction of the Commission with member states acting as its agents,” both groupings go on.
NAMA and the dangers for Lisbon II
Monday August 17 2009
Last week, the property developer Liam Carroll received active support from AIB, Bank of Ireland and the state-owned Anglo Irish Bank in his attempts to thwart a ruling by our Supreme Court.
These actions underline the position that the financial establishment is incapable of reforming itself and will use every weapon in its armoury to defend its interests — interests which, at the moment, are the complete opposite to those of taxpayers.
Do our politicians not understand the damage that is being done to our democracy by both this behaviour and, more importantly, by the lack of challenge from them, our elected leaders?
For example, why are they not demanding to know who within the banks is actually authorising these decisions; and why are the banks adopting this strategy of continuing to support a developer when the courts rejected his survival plan as “fanciful and lacking in reality”?
It is increasingly difficult to counter the once far-fetched argument that a second defeat of a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty is unfortunately necessary to bring about the collapse and ultimate reform of our financial and political system. Our political establishment has less than two months to convince an increasingly disaffected and angry electorate that they truly represent and will safeguard their interests.
Based on their performance to date, I’m not at all convinced they are capable of doing it, but for the sake of our future I hope I’m wrong.
Jim Brophy
Killiney, Co Dublin
I am absolutely disgusted by the Government’s plans for NAMA.
It is obvious that it’s not going to work. All it will do is bill the taxpayer for billions of euro to clear out banks’ toxic debts.
But what annoys me most is, the taxpayer will be paying off these debts for years on end, meaning young people who had no part whatsoever in creating this mess will have to pay for it in years to come.
I feel it is a crime that Brian Cowen and his Government shall make the teenagers of today pay for their mess.
They should be absolutely ashamed of themselves.
John Doran
Clondalkin, Dublin 22
Hi Sharon, lost you for a couple of days. Was it me or you with the problems. Had net access but could not get any of your sites.
Regards.
Germany—Military Empowerment by Stealth
August 17, 2009 | From theTrumpet.com
The mass media would have us believe that Germany continues to remain a weak military power, dependent on the U.S. and NATO for protection. But, what is Germany’s true military potential?
Ron Fraser .The recent ruling by the German Constitutional Court that the German-created Lisbon Treaty (European Constitution in new clothes) is unconstitutional, has more far-reaching effects than most have realized. At its roots, the ruling of that court has more to do with the empowerment of German military force than any other reason!
The problem with the mass media is that it is driven by surface considerations, reactions of the moment, headline-grabbing attention, rather than careful, deliberate analysis of any given question of importance.
Often it takes time, time to carefully read through, digest and analyze from a historical perspective, in particular, the long-term ramifications of any given event of the moment. Such is the case with the ruling by the German Constitutional Court on the Lisbon Treaty.
The Lisbon Treaty opens the way for the European Union to exhibit vastly more military clout than is apparent at present. Should the treaty be finally ratified, the penultimate element of the empowerment of that union of 27 nation-states to global superpower status would be set in place: the opportunity to become a united global military power, with an initial combined force of 2 million men at arms and a unified military equipment industrial output spanning the whole continent.
However, there remained a problem for the nation whose elites have been at the very heart of the European Idea from the beginning.
According to the “Joint Publication 1: Joint Warfare of the Armed Forces of the United States,” “The United States relies for its security on the complementary application of the basic instruments of national power: diplomatic, economic, informational and military” (Nov. 14, 2000).
To counter the U.S. on the other side of the Atlantic, the EU already has superseded the U.S. in diplomatic, economic and informational power. The Lisbon Treaty would but consolidate those gains. Yet the EU has yet to match, let alone exceed, U.S. military might, though this is the full intention of EU/German elites, as it has been since their ideological forebears went underground to pursue their dream of global conquest by subterfuge during the closing stages of World War ii.
What recently became obvious to the German elites is that the very constitution of their making, known by the tricky title of the “Lisbon Treaty,” had one glaring gap. It denied Germany its sole sovereign right to decide on the deployment of its military forces. The fact that all other 26 member nations were denied such a right, in common, is beside the point. Since the resurrection of the German High Command, under its rather innocuous title of the Military Command Council, it has been the intention of German military and political elites to secure the sole power for the command of Europe’s 2 million-man combined military force.
Enter the highest court of the land, the German Constitutional Court.
“[T]he court used a trick by declaring the treaty per se as constitutionally compliant, but at the same time declaring that part of the accompanying legislation as unconstitutional, which was used by the Bundestag (lower house) and Bundesrat (upper house) to ratify the treaty …. An important aspect is the decision-making process regarding military deployments of the European Union” (Informationsstelle Militarisierung, August 6; emphasis mine).
The point is that the Lisbon Treaty creates the avenue for the formation of that penultimate element of national power to become a reality under German dominance of the European Union, but does not allow Germany the free hand it demands to dictate the use of German military power.
“The Lisbon Treaty creates vast new military competence for the EU. … The judges [of the German Constitutional Court] clarified: Only the German Bundestag is empowered to decide about foreign military deployment of the federal army. … One of the questions was, who is going to decide whether the German federal army will participate in a military operation of the EU? The judges of the Constitutional Court have now clarified that this is the exclusive authority of the Bundestag” (ibid.).
Akin to the whole sequence of events that has built the EU to its present state of power, this is all a rather murky process. Through this “trick” of the German Constitutional Court, Germany is essentially holding the whip hand in saying “go” on any deployment of any EU battle group. In other words, should the Lisbon Treaty be ratified by all EU member nations, following the forced Irish vote in October, the EU will find that not only are the most vital EU parliamentary committees now dominated by Germany, but the deployment of EU battle groups—should the relevant changes to German legislation be endorsed by the German parliament—will be essentially at the direction of the German High Command under German parliamentary approval!
To be sure, certain legal challenges will have to be faced in Germany so that the parliamentary process does not inhibit rapid deployment of EU battle groups when required. But with Germany now having a firm hand on the whip of the European Parliament, and a legal prerogative likely that will trump the EU in the event of any legal conflict between that parliament and the German national will, it becomes patently obvious that the pace and the direction of the development of EU military power will be essentially Germanic!
Once this element of power—military force—is in place within the EU, it will remain for just one final element of power to be added—the ideological glue that will bind the EU together in a form of unity that will empower it as the single greatest superpower for its very brief moment in time. That ideological glue which has bound Europe together in six great resurrections of “Holy Roman” power is the glue of the Roman Catholic religion.
Should the Lisbon Treaty proceed to ratification subject to pending changes in German legislation, a “yes” vote by the Irish, and acceptance by the Poles and Czechs, then watch 2010 very closely for the Vatican to move ahead aggressively to enable that final element of power to become a reality!
http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?q=6430.4918.0.0
Ireland say NO to Lisbon Treaty
16 August 2009
Ireland say No to the Lisbon treaty, you are Europes last hope of saving every single independent nation from a tyrannical and fascist government. Where is the logic of these laws being made by on…
Ireland say No to the Lisbon treaty, you are Europes last hope of saving every single independent nation from a tyrannical and fascist government.
Where is the logic of these laws being made by one commissioner from your own country and 26 foreigners who know little about your heritage,customs and culture ?
Stand up and vote NO !
Video link –
Hi Phoenix One UK !
“Hi Sharon, lost you for a couple of days. Was it me or you with the problems. Had net access but could not get any of your sites.
Regards.
Comment by Phoenix One UK”
No problems at this end , anyway – both this site and the ‘Sister’ blog have had no down-time over the period you mentioned. It’s not the first time this has happened to you , so it’s quite possible that you are being targetted again by the likes of those who are all in favour of free speech ; providing you share their outlook , of course.
Thanks for your visits and your valued comments!
Sharon.
Aug 18, 2009
IWU urge all Taxi Drivers to Vote No
The Taxi Drivers Branch of the Independent Workers Union will be urging all of our members and all taxi drivers to vote No in the upcoming referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.
This treaty is the exact same treaty we rejected only a year ago. The guarantees are not legally binding, only promises that they will be introduced at some unknown future date.
Most importantly, the treaty furthers the free market values that amount to a race to the bottom for Taxi Drivers.. The competition organised by the regulator has resulted in our members having to work 70 hours a week to get a living wage. This is forcing driver to work against driver while lowering wages and working conditions to rock bottom.
The treaty is nine years old and out of date. It enshrines the failed economic policies that led to the current global recession. The cosy circle of politicians, bankers and developers who caused this crisis now expects ordinary working people to pay for their failures.
With all this in mind, we are urging all taxi drivers to organise their voice and send a clear message to the taxi regulator, Kathleen Doyle and Government Minister Dempsey and reject the Lisbon Treaty again.
http://www.swp.ie/index.php?page=322&dept=News
Special Report
Brezhnev in Dublin
By Doug Bandow on 8.18.09 @ 6:07AM
The so-called Brezhnev Doctrine is at work in the European Union. “What’s mine is mine, and what’s yours is negotiable,” runs the line. When it comes to the EU, any vote to increase authority in Brussels is viewed as final. Any vote against consolidating power is treated as merely temporary.
It’s the attitude towards Ireland, which in June 2008 voted to reject the Lisbon Treaty. Since the agreement requires unanimous agreement, the referendum theoretically killed the attempt to expand the EU’s authority. However, the European elite viewed the setback as only temporary and insisted that Ireland vote again. Dublin will hold a revote on October 2.
The lack of obvious practical benefits of a consolidated government in Brussels for most Europeans has not prevented the development of a strong elite consensus behind Lisbon. Roger Cole, head of the Irish Peace and Neutrality Alliance, argues bluntly: “The EU political elite supports the treaty because it continues to transfer power away from the people and their own national democratic institutions to themselves and their institutions, the Council of Ministers, the European Court of Justice and the parliament.”
Toward this end the Swedish think tank Timbro estimates that the EU spends several billion dollars annually promoting an expanded EU. Lorraine Mullally of the London-based think tank Open Europe complains: The European Commission increasingly “sees itself not just as ‘guardian of the Treaties,’ but as a political campaign group.”
There are few dissenting public voices. Former Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek admitted: “This treaty is bad and we know it.” But he said he felt he had no choice but to support Lisbon: “If we hadn’t signed the Lisbon Treaty and had been pushed to the sidelines of the European Union we would have had no chance of promoting our national interests. That’s the main reason. It was the lesser of two evils.”
Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) are no more willing than anyone else to debate popular dissatisfaction with a consolidated government. Hans-Gert Poettering, the last president of the European Parliament (EP), even advocated locking out anti-federalists: “I think it is very important that the pro-European MEPs cooperate well so the anti-Europeans cannot make their voices heard so strongly.”
The difference between popular and elite attitudes is stark. An Open Europe poll from 2007 found that roughly 75 percent of Europeans — with a clear majority in every nation — wanted to vote on any new treaty transferring power to Brussels. EU Internal Markets Commissioner (Ireland’s representative on the European Commission) Charlie McCreevy argued, undoubtedly with some hyperbole, that European leaders “know quite well that if the question was put to their electorate by a referendum the answer in 95 percent of the countries would probably have been No as well.” In fact, polls suggest that Lisbon would fail in about half of the EU members.
No wonder former French President Valery Giscard d’Estaing, who played a leading role in drafting the original constitution, opined: “Above all, it is to avoid having referendums.”
Twenty-six of 27 EU member states have approved Lisbon by parliamentary vote, usually backed by both the main governing and opposition parties. In Ireland, however, the constitution required a referendum on the treaty. And last June the measure went down to defeat.
Oops.
Although the treaty theoretically was dead, supporters assumed that eventual approval was inevitable: the only question was how?
Ironically, the pro-treaty lobby, which had designed the process to eliminate public input, expressed its democratic outrage over the result. A British Labour MP complained that the Irish had “become extremely arrogant.” Britain’s Lord Mark Malloch-Brown grandly declared that “I am not sure whether the voters of Ireland should have a right of veto over the aspirations of all the other people of Europe. I am not sure whether that is, or is not, democracy.”
Spanish EU Commissioner Joaquin Almunia claimed that it is not “very democratic” to hold a referendum on complicated issues like the Lisbon Treaty. German Interior Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble declared: “a few million Irish cannot decide on behalf of 495 million Europeans.”
Some Treaty advocates proposed throwing Ireland out of the EU or relegating the country to associate status. Most, however, preferred to pressure Dublin to hold another poll, as it had after Irish voters turned down another treaty in 2001 before ratifying it in a second vote.
The Irish government has set a repeat vote for October 2. To sweeten the pot, so to speak, other European governments have promised several future concessions, allowing Ireland to retain its national commissioner and opt out of a European foreign policy. After the recent EU summit, Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen claimed: “We came here with two aims. Ireland wanted firm legal guarantees. We got them. We wanted a commitment to a protocol. We got that.”
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/08/18/the-drubbing-of-dublin
Left-wing groups launch anti-Lisbon campaign
18/08/2009 – 11:48:31
A number of left-wing organisations have launched a joint campaign for a ‘no’ vote in the forthcoming re-run of the Lisbon Treat referendum.
The Vote No to Lisbon group is the same coalition that opposed the initial referendum as the Campaign Against the EU Constitution.
It includes (P)Sinn Féin and several small left-wing groups, including the Socialist Party, the Socialist Workers Party, the Workers Party, the Irish Republican Socialist Party, the People’s Movement and Eirigi.
They say the Lisbon Treaty, if ratified, would lead to more privatisation, more right-wing economics, more militarisation and less democratic control within the EU.
http://breakingnews.iol.ie/news/ireland/leftwing-groups-launch-antilisbon-campaign-423011.html
Hi Sharon,
Noted what you said. Nice to know I am causing someone problems. Means I am doing something right. Regards.
Ireland – A long Irish tradition favouring neutrality should encourage us to vote No to Lisbon II
August 13, 2009 by Infowars Ireland
by Roger Cole
Peace and Neutrality Alliance
Many people are worried about the militarism implicit in the text of the Lisbon Treaty. If passed, it will effectively makes arguments for disarmament and reduction in military capabilities illegal and redundant, as each will be constitutionally obliged to increase its weapons spending. In today’s Irish Times, Roger Cole of the Peace and Neutrality Alliance argues that a vote in favour undermines the fight for Irish independence, democracy and neutrality.
FOR GENERATIONS some Irish people have fought for Irish independence, democracy and neutrality, while others have fought for imperialism. The second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty is just another battle in this conflict and, whatever the outcome, the struggle will continue.
for full text link to-
http://info-wars.org/?p=5194
Note: My bet is on the Irish people. I just wish they obtained more support from the people of Europe. After all, the Irish are also fighting for their democracy, and it is a major battle against a monster calling itself the EU.
Stealth Wars
20 August 2009
By Phoenix One UK
In April 1952, Jean Monnet (the founding father of the EU), said
“EUROPE’S NATIONS SHOULD BE GUIDED TOWARDS THE SUPERSTATE WIHOUT THEIR PEOPLE UNDERSTANDING WHAT IS HAPPENING. THIS CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED BY SUCCESSIVE STEPS, EACH ONE DISGUISED AS HAVING AN ECONOMIC PURPOSE, BUT WHICH WILL EVENTUALLY AND IRREVERSIBLY LEAD TO FEDERATION.”
On 27 April 1997, the Sunday Telegraph published an article entitled “How MI6 pushed Britain to join Europe”, by Paul Lashmar and James Oliver, which showed a secretly-funded Foreign Office unit used public money to mount a covert propaganda operation aimed at ensuring Britain joined the European Community.
On 19 September 2000, the Telegraph published an article by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard regarding DECLASSIFIED US government documents that showed their intelligence service ran a campaign in 50s and 60s to build a united Europe. It was funded and directed by the European federalist movement.
The documents confirmed suspicions that the USA worked aggressively behind the scenes to push Britain into a European Superstate. One memorandum, dated July 26, 1950, gave instructions for a campaign to promote a fully fledged European parliament. It was signed by Gen William J Donovan, head of the American wartime Office of Strategic Services, precursor of the CIA.
A debate was started within a thread on MSN entitled BRING BACK THE ACT OF TREASON where it was shown past and present British governments committed acts of treason. Without going into detail, it is enough to note Ted Heath, before dying, admitted having committed treason, and, on 2 February 2006, Tony Blair also admitted treason within a meeting in Oxford.
In 1971, Raymond Blackburn challenged the government’s right to join the common market on the grounds that it could only do so by surrendering the UK’s sovereignty. A year later, Ross McWhirter invoked the Bill of Rights to show that the government did not have authority to give away the right and liberties of the people. Tragically, he was assassinated before the matter was decided. His brother Norris made a similar attempt to question the legality of the Maastricht Treaty in 1993. Summonses were issued against the then Foreign Secretary for treason. The Attorney General used a purported power to take over the case and then drop it as “not in the public interest”. Yet the Bill of Rights prohibits “suspending laws or the operation of laws”. His action was also contrary to natural justice because the Attorney General was sitting in judgement in his own cause.
Of relevance is Anne Palmer JP’s open letter of 19 February 2009 to Lord Onslow entitled Bill of Rights and new written Constitution where she states,
“…the Declaration and Bill of Rights 1688/9 holds the Oath of Allegiance to which British Governments and the rest of us swear to the Crown. Violation of that Oath is the very
essence of treason. I therefore object to any dislodging or repealing of our Common Law Constitution.”
The UK is currently at war, a stealth war, and it is being betrayed by its own government, a government with an allegiance to the European Union. The UK is on the brink of total destruction with the last line of defence being the British people. Only the people can stop what is happening, and they can do it with the one right still retained. The EU dictatorship can be stopped at the ballot box.
The second Irish referendum on Lisbon treaty is 43 days away with the government and its almost unlimited public funds already campaigning heavily for a Yes vote. No campaigners on both sides of the political divide have launched a strong counter-offensive.
According to EU rules, the Treaty must be ratified by all 27 member states with Ireland under heavy pressure from EU leadership to return a Yes vote on 2 October 2009. Political critics of Lisbon treaty have accused the EU leadership of ignoring the will of the people to force into existence a European Superstate. The EU has abused powers to fund a multi €billion propaganda campaign to mislead the people of Europe, and they are doing it using their own taxes. We are actually paying the EU to destroy our own country.
In a speech in the EU Parliament in July, Nigel Farage (UKIP) blasted the EU Parliament for “lying and cheating” its way into creating a European superstate. Farage pledged his party’s support for the Europe of Freedom and Democracy group, a non-partisan group formed to oppose the Lisbon Treaty to assist the Irish No campaigners. “The future of European democracy rests very heavily on Irish shoulders,” he said.
Our government, past and present, illegally surrendered control of the UK to the EU without a mandate from the people. At no time did the British people give the government a mandate to surrender UK sovereignty to the EU. All treaties signed without a mandate from the people are illegal and not binding.
Contrary to common belief, not all wars are fought using conventional weapons. This war is very real and just as deadly for our nation. To make matters worse, the major parties have failed to represent the people who elected them.
In times of war and peace propaganda is a powerful tool to achieve a specific objective. It is not new but its methods have been perfected over time. It is a con, something that uses ideology to make people buy something that is not achievable. Perfection is not achievable. Removing violence and crime are not achievable. Creating a super race of people is not achievable. Why? Because people are individuals and no-one is perfect.
The EU dream has always been an illusion, smoke you cannot touch. Give it too much power and the dream will be exposed for what it truly is, a nightmare. Evidence of this fact is already evident throughout not only the UK but EU. It can and will get much worst if the EU wins.
Hi again , Phoenix One UK !
“Hi Sharon,
Noted what you said. Nice to know I am causing someone problems. Means I am doing something right. Regards.”
The problem is definitely at your end , PO – we are firing on all cylinders here! You are without doubt upsetting the pro-EU ‘establishment’ and they will continue to attempt to silence you . And continue to fail , I hope.
Thanks!
Sharon.
By Aideen Sheehan
Friday August 21 2009
JAMES Reynolds has been struggling to get a political foothold for many years.
His launch of the Farmers For No campaign yesterday is his most high-profile foray into politics so far.
The 41-year-old bachelor livestock farmer was Longford chairman of the Irish Farmers Association from 1999 to 2003.
He now chairs his local Ballinalee IFA branch, and says the IFA remains his primary focus.
But he has been openly critical of IFA president Padraig Walshe in the past — sticking up posters criticising his role in the sugar industry’s demise at the Ploughing Championships in 2006.
Mr Reynolds made a bid for election to Longford County Council in 2004, as an independent, but only garnered around 200 votes.
He also campaigned for losing Libertas candidate Declan Ganley in the recent European elections — as chairman of the now defunct party’s Longford branch.
He was a member of Fine Gael from 1989 to 1992, rejoining the party in 2007, but leaving last year in protest at the party’s support for the Lisbon treaty.
Mr Reynolds has also strongly backed the pro-life cause, and he was closely associated with Youth Defence leader Justin Barrett.
He said he hopes to bankroll his group’s ‘No’ campaign by gaining contributions from his fellow farmers .
– Aideen Sheehan
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/treaty-opponent-no–stranger-to-politics-1866013.html
Stop The Continentals When They Flirt With Dictatorship
It seems a bit weird for Intel to be urging its Irish staff, all 4,200 of them, to vote for the Lisbon Treaty when it’s put before the Irish people for the second time in October.
“Intel Corporation’s management is supporting our Irish management team as we make our views clear that it is important for the country, and for multinational companies within the country, that Ireland remains a player at the heart of Europe”, says Jim O’Hara, General Manager of Intel Ireland.
The trouble with Intel’s advice is that every right thinking person in Europe is cheering on the Irish to do what they did last year, when they were first asked to vote on the Lisbon Treaty, and give it a second resounding raspberry.
The problem with the Lisbon Treaty is that it gives more power to the EC and less power to nation states.
This is in direct opposition to the principle of subsidiarity, meaning that decisions should be taken at the lowest possible level, which was made part of European law in the 1992 Treaty of Maastricht.
The Lisbon Treaty contains various stratagems for concentrating power in Brussels, like changing the majority voting rules on the EU Council, appointing a European Foreign Minister to co-ordinate European foreign policy and, worst of all, appointing a President of the European Council which could be the awful Mr Blair.
The Continentals have a penchant for dictators, and everything must be done to stop them indulging it.
http://www.electronicsweekly.com/blogs/david-manners-semiconductor-blog/2009/08/stop-the-continentals-when-the.html
Day School on Lisbon Treaty
http://www.voteno.ie
Saturday 22nd August, 3 – 6pm, Central Hotel, Exchequer Street, Dublin 2
Speakers include: Andy Storey(AFRI) Brian O’Boyle & Sinéad Kennedy (editors of VoteNo.ie)
WHY WE MUST VOTE NO (AGAIN) TO LISBON
When does “No” mean no? Three times the people of Europe have said No, in various forms, to the Lisbon Treaty. Now, in the vain hope that the fourth time will be the charm Irish voters are being made to vote again on exactly the same Treaty.
The political elites are hoping that this time around they can use the economic crisis to frighten people into voting yes. What they fail to mention is that it is the very Thatcherite policies of financial speculation and privatisation, policies enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty that created this crisis in the first place.
Millions of workers across Europe are losing their jobs cut and seeing their wages slashed, while governments across Europe are trying to blame the crisis of capitalism on public spending, and are attacking our public services. At the same time they are happily handing over willing to billions of euros for bank bail-outs to they people who created this mess to begin with.
Instead of EU supported bailouts for bankers, we need to fundamentally rethink the free-market fundamentalist direction in which the EU has been driven. We need to build a different type of Europe, one that puts the interests of people before those of profit and big business.
This is our chance to hit back. Use it. Vote NO and tell this government that NO means NO.
Come along to the VoteNo.ie Day School to hear the arguments and organise against the Lisbon Treaty
Saturday 22nd August, 3 – 6pm
Central Hotel, Exchequer Street, Dublin 2
SESSION ONE: 3 – 4.15:
Why you should Vote NO to the Lisbon Treaty
Introduced by Brian O’Boyle (SWP) and Andy Storey (AFRI)
SESSION TWO: 4.30-5.45
No means No: Organising to Defeat Lisbon a Second Time.
Introduced by Sinéad Kennedy (editor of Voteno.ie)
http://www.swp.ie/index.php?page=320&dept=News
Irish punters start to bet on “No” for Lisbon Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:19am EDT DUBLIN (Reuters) –
Bookmaker Paddy Power has cut the odds on a “No” vote in a second Irish referendum on the European Union’s Lisbon treaty after a flow of punters gambled on another defeat, a spokeswoman said Friday.
Irish voters, representing less than 1 percent of the 27-nation bloc’s population, will once again decide the fate of the charter on October 2 after their shock rejection last year delayed its reforms, which are designed to streamline the EU’s decision-making and give it a stronger voice in world affairs.
The most recent opinion poll, published in early June, showed 54 percent of respondents backed the treaty but last year surveys also showed a majority in favor until a few weeks before the referendum.
“We have seen a shift toward the ‘No’ side in the last couple of weeks and it appears our punters think things could be just as tight second time around,” Sharon McHugh, a spokeswoman for Paddy Power, said.
“Until a few polls emerge however, there’s just no telling how close.”
Paddy Power cut the odds of a “No” vote from 5/1 against to 5/2 against — a probability of two in seven.
Ireland is one of four countries that have yet to ratify the treaty.
Germany is expected to ratify the charter before elections on September 27 but Poland and the Czech Republic have said they will wait until Ireland approves the treaty before they endorse it.
The Irish government is hoping that concessions wrung from Brussels, fears of isolation during a global recession and a vigorous “Yes” campaign will swing them the vote.
So far, much of the impetus for the “Yes” side has come from civil society and business groups with little government campaigning.
Opponents of the treaty, who include disparate groups from the left and right, formally launched their campaign earlier this week, arguing the charter would leave workers worse off.
(Reporting by Carmel Crimmins; Editing by Kevin Liffey)
http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE57K2DN20090821
EU treaty opponents launch campaign in Ireland :
Opponents of the stalled Lisbon treaty have formally launched their campaign in Ireland where voters will vote on the controversial document on 2 October.
Newly-elected Irish MEP Joe Higgins, one of the leaders of the so-called “Vote No to Lisbon” initiative, said the treaty offers “no solution to the economic crisis.”
The campaign, which used to be called the “Campaign Against the EU Constitution,” was opened in Dublin in the run up to the second referendum.
Speaking at the press conference Higgins urged Irish voters to reject the treaty based on its content, rather than a desire to “kick the government out of office.”
Higgins said that it was false “through and through” to portray the treaty as a solution to the economic crisis, saying, “Lisbon is a treaty for decades, not for one or two years and therefore it shapes the Europe we will have to live in.”
Higgins said he was also “very concerned” about how the debate would be conducted in the media.
He said guidelines issued to broadcasters by the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland (BCI) indicating they did not have to allocate 50:50 airtime to the Yes and No sides were “extremely sinister”.
Speaking at the same event, Brid Smith, a local councillor in Ireland, said the ‘guarantees’ obtained by the Irish government at a recent EU summit did not change the treaty by “one iota”.
She said, “We believe that Irish voters are being threatened, cajoled and lied to.”
An Irish Times leader article,meanwhile, says that “the battle lines are drawn” with both sides now having officially launched their campaigns.
It notes that “In September, the battle proper will start” and that according to the Referendum Commission “91 per cent are extremely or quite likely” to vote.
Elsewhere, Irish foreign affairs minister Micheal Martin has spelled out what he says are the likely consequences of a ‘No’ vote in October.
Martin said that “it would, in my view, be wrong to argue that our relationship with our EU partners would be unaffected by a second rejection of the Lisbon treaty.
“A second ‘No’ vote would be deeply damaging to our standing within the EU”.
As well as Ireland, three other countries (Germany, Poland and the Czech Republic) still have to formally ratify the treaty. If approved, it will will come into effect on 1 January, 2010.
http://www.theparliament.com/no_cache/latestnews/news-article/newsarticle/eu-treaty-opponents-launch-campaign-in-ireland/
Press Summary ArchiveFarmers for No campaign: Ireland’s EU voting weight will ‘diminish’ under Lisbon Treaty; Czech Senators’ legal challenge set to delay ratification
21 August 2009
Speaking at the launch of the ‘Farmers for No’ campaign in Ireland yesterday, Chairman James Reynolds said that, under the Lisbon Treaty, “Our voting-weight as a member-state diminishes from 2 per cent, as it currently is under the Nice Treaty rules, to 0.8 per cent.” He said that the Treaty also promoted “the culture of hyper-regulation from Brussels,” the Irish Times reports.
He added that, “European Commission proposals on inheritance law would prevent farmers passing on family farms as a single working unit; that’s unacceptable…and the danger is, if the Lisbon Treaty is ratified, that will come into effect.” Under the Lisbon Treaty Ireland stands to lose 40 percent of its power to block legislation it disagrees with.
The Irish Independent reports that US multinational Intel is planning to spend a six-figure sum on campaigning for a ‘Yes’ vote in the second referendum on 2 October. Intel Ireland General Manager Jim O’Hara said that Intel would be spending “a few hundred thousand euros” on its publicity campaign for Lisbon.
Meanwhile, Prague Monitor reports that Czech Minister for European Affairs Stefan Fuele is concerned about a group of ODS party Senators’ intention to file a complaint with the Constitutional Court against amendments to a Czech law connected with the Lisbon Treaty. The ‘special mandate’ prevents the Czech government from approving transfer of powers to the EU without the parliament’s agreement but the Senators say the law’s provisions are not sufficient. Fuele has expressed his fear that the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty would be further delayed by the move.
EUROPEAN REFERENDUM INITIATIVEArticles10 July, 2008
Joining the Dots: The EU is designed to protect patents and corporate control – not the health and interests of its citizensBy Paul Anthony Taylor – The European Commission’s Directorate General for Health and Consumers claims that its job is to “help make Europe’s citizens healthier, safer and more confident.” In reality however, and as more and more people are beginning to discover, the European Union’s primary concerns are not those of ordinary citizens but rather the interests of multi-billion euro European corporations and their patents on health-endangering products such as GMO seeds, pharmaceutical drugs, artificial food additives and pesticides.
As this article shows, the root-cause motivation behind the recent absurd attacks on organic farming and vitamin supplements is the fact that organic seeds and vitamins cannot be patented and, along with other natural products, therefore threaten the multi-billion euro profits from the sale of GMOs and pharmaceutical drugs.
Read on to discover how the European Union is misleading you about your health and why a Europe for the People, by the People – as opposed to a Europe of Big Business – is now more urgently needed than ever.
http://www.eu-referendum.org/english/articles/20080710_joiningthedots.html
What happened to the Irish Times guilt trip policy with regard to Lisbon ? There were a lot of guilt-trips before Lisbon 1.0 – why have the guilt-trips not been released for Lisbon 2.0 ? Are the establishment running out of material for guilt trips ???
Furious fishermen call for ‘No’ in Treaty
By Ralph Riegel
Wednesday August 26 2009
IRISH fishermen furious at having to struggle to survive financially while being forced to dump their catches at sea are planning to oppose the second EU Lisbon Treaty.
The Irish Fishermen’s Organisation (IFO) staged a special meeting in Cork yesterday — and are now going to lobby for a ‘No’ vote after accusing Brussels of undermining their livelihoods.
The IFO also lobbied for a ‘No’ vote in the original Lisbon Treaty ballot last year.
Yesterday, angry Cork and Kerry fishermen said they were being driven out of business by Brussels’ fishery policies, claiming that they blatantly favoured non-EU imports and fleets of larger EU member states.
Struggling
IFO south-west chairman Ebbie Sheehan said nothing had changed in Brussels since 2008 when fishermen rejected the original Lisbon Treaty.
He said Irish operators were still struggling to survive financially with higher operating costs and a draconian fishing quota regime that forced fishermen to dump hard-won catches at sea.
Angry fishermen said yesterday that fish was being imported into the EU from non-EU member states.
The IFO move came as Cork Chamber of Commerce said that it would launch a major pro-Lisbon Treaty campaign under the direction of IBEC, with advertising and poster campaigns.
It said a ‘Yes’ vote was in the best interests of the country.
– Ralph Riegel
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/furious-fishermen-call-for-no-in-treaty-1869161.html
Tuesday, 25th August, 2009 12:00pm
Local farmers rebel over IFA Lisbon stance
Two men from north Westmeath are among a number of disgruntled farmers across the country who have organised themselves to campaign against the IFA’s decision to support the re-run of the Lisbon Treaty referendum.
Paddy Boyhan of Ranaghan, Collinstown and Noel McCabe of Glenidan have aligned themselves with the “Farmers for No” group (www.farmersforno.blogspot.com), which is led by Edgeworthstown farmer, James Reynolds.
Mr. Boyhan, an organic and suckler cow farmer, is one of the group’s committee members. He is a veteran member of the United Farmers’ Association – a farmers’ lobby group set up as an alternative to the IFA twenty years ago.
Mr. McCabe, a former Westmeath Representative on the IFA’s National Industrial and Environment Committee, was elected as Treasurer for the group, which had its official launch in Dublin last week.
Recalling reports that half of farmers had voted against the Lisbon Treaty last year, Paddy Boyhan reckons that “Farmers for No” speaks for the majority of farmers this time around, in light of savage cuts being imposed on small farmers in recent months.
He said that long-term EU agricultural policies, enshrined in the Mansholt Plan of the 1960s, were designed to force small farmers off the land, and are coming to fruition now – to be copperfastened by Lisbon.
“People at the bottom are going to be worst hit. Farmers depending on agriculture alone are on low income as it is, and now they have to deal with higher levies, the withdrawal of REPS and the suckler cow scheme,” Mr. Boyhan said. “All the things we’re depending on are going down the swanny.”
Central to the “Farmers for No” group’s campaign against Lisbon is its argument that the treaty will create the legal conditions for Turkish accession to the EU, doubling the number of farmers in the Union, and devastating farming livelihoods in Ireland.
Mr. Boyhan describes the IFA’s decision to back Lisbon as disappointing, but not surprising.
“It’s a top-down organisation. They’re completely divorced from reality,” he said. “There’s always one or two powerful groups telling you the sunshine is better on the other side of the hill.
“But where were the IFA when the Beef Tribunal was called nineteen years ago? Where were they when the sugar industry was allowed to collapse, and now when there’s a shortage of sugar?
“Since we joined the EEC in 1973 the number of people working in farming in this country has been decimated. But we’re not all going to be led hook, line and sinker to the slaughter.”
http://www.westmeathexaminer.ie/news/mullingar/articles/2009/08/25/390594-local-farmers-rebel-over-ifa-lisbon-stance/
Dear Friends Outside Ireland,
The E-mail below is being sent today on behalf of this organisation to activists in the various No-side groups in Ireland’s Lisbon Treaty referendum re-run. It will give you some idea of the current situation regarding this referendum here.
The Lisbon re-run takes place on 2 October, five weeks from Friday next.
This is not just an Irish battle for democracy in face of the EU-State-in-the-making whose Constitution would be the Treaty of Lisbon. We would like to turn it into a European battle for democracy on Irish soil – not just for this country’s sake but for the sake of all our countries.
So anything that you can do in or from your own country to show soldiarity with the Irish No-side over the five weeks to our referendum and to bring home to voters here that Ireland would not be isolated or “punished” if they dare to vote No to Lisbon again, could be very helpful to us in our democratic struggle.
Such actions could take the form, for example, of delegations to Irish Embassies abroad to hand in letters congratulating Ireland for being the only EU country whose people are being allowed to vote on the “Lisbon Constitution”. . . Or demonstrations outside the EU Commission offices in your country, protesting at the Commission’s outrageous and unlawful interference in the Irish referendum campaign, something that has been sanctioned by Commission President J.M.Barrose and his Secretary-General, the Irishwoman Catherine Day.
Any such actions would of course need to be brought to the attention of the Irish media, so far as possible, if voters in Ireland are to be made aware of them. Details of the Irish media can be got on Media Live
Or people outside Ireland could send letters in English to the Irish national and provincial newspapers making various points about the Lisbon Treaty, showing thereby that people in other EU countries are against the Treaty too. Or they could write privately to friends and acquaintances they may have in Ireland, or to Irish people at addresses taken from our phone book. Or use the internet, blogs and e-mail, especially social networking sites, to send messages to people here.
Or if people had the resources, they might consider putting advertisements in the Irish newspapers. These should not of course entail “telling” Irish people how to vote, or be hectoring or patronising in any way. They should rather make factual points about the Treaty, point out that people elsewhere in Europe are being denied a chance to vote on it, that Ireland would not be isolated if it votes No again, and appealing to Irish voters to “bear us in mind” when they vote on 2 October.
And friends outside Ireland will be able to think of other ways to show their concern and solidarity.
This organisation has not the resources of personnel or time to advise our friends abroad on the details of any such support. We merely point out its desirability as part of the international effort to defend national democracy in face of the constitutional revolution which the Lisbon Treaty would entail for all 27 EU States.
We appeal to you however to do whatever you can and to use your imagination and creativity in this matter to the best of your ability.
Yours faithfully
Anthony Coughlan
Director
(President, Foundation for EU Democracy, Brussels; Senior Lecturer Emeritus in Social Policy, Trinity College Dublin)
____________________________________________
Copy of letter to Irish No-side activists for your information:
The National Platform EU Research and Information Centre
24 Crawford Avenue
Dublin 9
Ireland
Tel.: 01-8305792
Web-site:
nationalplatform.org
Hi Healthy Sceptic!
It’s early days yet , but I have no doubt that ‘The Irish Times’ won’t let us down – they will (ab)use their dominant position and ‘scare’ their readers into voting ‘Yes’. The main scare tactic so far is centering on the ‘vote-NO-and-we’re-out-of-Europe’ scenario , even though that tactic didn’t work for them when first tried in June 2008.
Thanks for the visit!
Sharon.
Doug Bandow: Voting until they get it right in the European Union
By: Doug Bandow
Examiner Staff Writer
August 28, 2009 When it comes to the European Union, any vote to increase authority in Brussels is viewed as final. Any vote against consolidating power is treated as merely temporary.
The Lisbon Treaty is the perfect example of such a power grab. Among other things, it shifts responsibilities from national parliaments to European parliament, reduces the number of areas where unanimity is required (eliminating national vetoes), creates a president as a person (as opposed to rotating presidencies for nations), and creates a foreign minister to push a continental foreign policy.
In June 2008, Ireland voted against the treaty. Since the agreement requires unanimous agreement, the referendum theoretically killed the attempt. However, the European elite insisted that Ireland vote again. Dublin will hold a revote on October 2.
Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) are unwilling to debate popular dissatisfaction with a consolidated government. Hans-Gert Poettering, the last president of the European Parliament (EP), even advocated locking out anti-federalists: “I think it is very important that the pro-European MEPs cooperate well so the anti-Europeans cannot make their voices heard so strongly.”
An Open Europe poll from 2007 found that roughly 75 percent of Europeans-with a clear majority in every nation-wanted to vote on any new treaty transferring power to Brussels. Lisbon likely would fail in about half of the EU member states.
No wonder former French President Valery Giscard d’Estaing, who played a leading role in drafting the original constitution, opined about the need “to avoid having referendums.”
Spanish EU Commissioner Joaquin Almunia claimed that it is not “very democratic” to hold a referendum on complicated issues like the Lisbon Treaty. German Interior Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble declared: “A few million Irish cannot decide on behalf of 495 million Europeans.”
Some Treaty advocates proposed throwing Ireland out of the EU or relegating the country to associate status. Most, however, preferred to pressure Dublin to hold another poll.
Some Treaty advocates proposed throwing Ireland out of the EU or relegating the country to associate status. Most, however, preferred to pressure Dublin to hold another poll.
To sweeten the pot, so to speak, other European governments have promised several future concessions. Yet last December, Irish Foreign Minister Micheal Martin stated, “We will not be asking people to vote on the same proposition.”
What Dublin received, however, was the promise of future action, not present amendments. To Irish Socialist MEP Joe Higgins, the guarantee process is “an elaborate charade.” Similarly, explains Open Europe’s Lorraine Mullally: “Despite lengthy negotiations and lots of superficial statements about ‘respecting’ the Irish ‘no’ vote, not a single comma has changed.”
Regardless, if it doesn’t succeed the second time around, threatened one German Socialist MEP, Ireland will face “isolation” and “second class” status. British MEP Daniel Hannan writes of an Irish friend who told him, “We didn’t fight off the might of the British Empire just so as to be bossed about by the Belgians.”
Moreover, the Czech and Polish presidents have to yet to sign off on the agreement. If Britain’s Conservatives come to power before the Lisbon process is completed, they are likely to reverse the Labor government’s ratification.
Oxford professor Timothy Garton Ash wrote in the Guardian of “the essential grandeur of this project we call the European Union, where nations born in so much blood work together freely in a commonwealth of democracies.”
He is right, but his argument actually works against the Lisbon Treaty, or at least the current ratification process. Democracy doesn’t mean drowning out the voices of those who would be forced to live under the government.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/OpEd-Contributor/Voting-until-they-get-it-right-in-the-European-Union-8162029-55444307.html
EUROPEAN REFERENDUM INITIATIVE
August 28, 2009
Latest News Updates
Keep up-to-date on the latest developments with our regular updates and analysis of the key news stories.
Included in this edition:
Furious fishermen call for ‘No’ in Treaty
Irish punters start to bet on “No” for Lisbon
Breakaway farmers’ group calls for ‘no’ vote
Czech senators in fresh move against Lisbon treaty
For full details of these and other stories link to-
http://www.eu-referendum.org/english/news/index.html
German court ruling calls into question the entire European project post Lisbon
Published Date: 27 August 2009 By Struan Stevenson A RECENT landmark legal ruling in Germany has sent the EU integration project into complete disarray. The German Constitutional Court examined the Lisbon Treaty – the successor to the infamous EU Constitution – and ruled the sovereignty of a member state (in this case Germany), must always take precedence over diktats from Brussels.
The Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe effectively declared itself the highest supervisory body in conflicts between Germany and the EU, thus explicitly placing itself above the authority of the European Court of Justice. As Der Spiegel reported: “This borders on a declaration of war on the European Court, which sees itself as the only authority capable of ruling on the validity and applicability of EU law.”
The German judges went further by ruling the German Parliament had been wrong in passing an “accompanying law” to the Lisbon Treaty, which determined the rights of the German parliament to participate in European legislation. By passing the right to monitor the implementation of EU laws to Brussels, the Bundestag was acting unconstitutionally, said the judges, and subjecting people to the “whims of a bureaucracy that lacks sufficient democratic legitimacy”. Indeed, the Karlsruhe judges ruled it was clearly not the case that “the EU parliament is a representative body of a sovereign European people” as set down in the Lisbon Treaty. They explained:
“After all, EU members of parliament were not elected according to the principle of electoral equality, in other words, one man one vote, but rather according to national contingents, meaning that a Maltese MEP represents 67,000 Maltese, a Swedish MEP has a constituency of 455,000 Swedes and in Germany, the ratio is 1 to 857,000.”
The court saw this as a clear contradiction to the remainder of EU law, which is constructed around the central idea of prohibiting discrimination based on nationality. According to the court’s concluding statements, this contradiction can only be explained by the fact that the EU is not a state but rather “an association of sovereign states” and, consequently, “there can be no sovereign citizens’ union as well as no completely representative organ in the form of the European Parliament, with the result that the Bundestag must receive substantially more rights”.
The Karlsruhe interpretation thus demolishes the old European idea that the recognised democratic deficits in the EU would disappear completely of their own accord by enhancing the rights of the European Parliament, allowing MEPs to assume the role of the national parliaments.
All of this has come as a political bombshell to the newly elected European Parliament, where Europhiles eagerly await the outcome of a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty due to be held in Ireland on 2 October, praying for a Yes vote. If the highest court in Germany can rule the EU, under the terms of the Lisbon Treaty, is undemocratic, then the project aimed at further and deeper EU integration will be called into question.
UK Conservative MEPs have defected from the large, centre-right, integrationist EPP Group in the European Parliament, to form their own, more eurosceptic, European Conservatives and Reformists group (ECR).
The ECR sees itself as offering a voice to the millions of Europeans who oppose the concept of an EU superstate and instead wish to see the development of a successful economic, rather than political union.
Now, according to the German judges, national identity must take precedence over integration.
http://news.scotsman.com/politics/German-court-ruling-calls-into.5592028.jp
August 30, 2009…12:40 The End of the Nation States of Europe
by Philip Jones
Published: Jul. 21, 2009 – The Righteous Alliance
“Europe’s nations should be guided towards the super-state without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation.” Jean Monnet (Founding Father Of The EU).
On June 12th 2008, the fate of nearly 500 million people will be decided by a country whose population totals only 4.2 million. The people of the Republic Of Ireland will be the only `citizens` of the European Union given the opportunity to have their say on what is potentially the most fundamental piece of legislation in the history of the `Old Continent`. All the other member states have simply ignored the wishes of their people and left ratification to be `rubber stamped` by their respective parliaments. However, it is necessary for all twenty seven member states to complete ratification before the `Treaty` becomes legally binding.
So, if the Irish vote is `NO` then the treaty will not be able to be implemented, at least for the present. But, if the Irish people swallow the massive `Pro Treaty` propaganda and vote `Yes`, then the fate of, and inevitable demise of the Nation States of Europe will be sealed. There will be no more serious obstacles left to Federalisation. The long dreamed of (by the Federalists that is) United States Of Europe will become a reality.
Many, if not the majority of people on both sides of the Atlantic have been `duped` for decades into believing that the EEC/EU is about a `free trade` zone. This is not at all the case, as the above quote by Monsieur Monet illustrates very clearly. So what are the ramifications of a `Yes` vote by the Irish.
The European Union was founded on lies and deceit at the very highest levels of government. This trail of deception has continued since, and on Thursday 13th December 2007 stopped momentarily in Lisbon Portugal, where the `dignitaries` of the member states of this `trading bloc` signed the `EU Reform Treaty.`
This `Treaty` replaces the EU Constitution rejected in 2005 by both France and the Netherlands. Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor and the former French President `Giscard D`Estaing are among many European ministers who have confirmed that the `Treaty` is but the Constitution by another name. The only differentials being the dropping from the new document those articles relating to the EU Flag, Anthem and Motto. Yet only two days prior to the `Historic event` in Lisbon, sixteen member states `broke cover` and called for an amendment to the `Treaty `and the reinstatement of these three articles, thereby transforming the `Treaty` into the original Constitution.
They also want to impose the `single currency` on all those member states still retaining their `indigenous` currencies and are suggesting that a `Europe Day` become a holiday for celebration.
The leader of the United Kingdom Independence Party `Nigel Farage` said, ‘The full treachery being imposed is at last fully out in the open. The pathetic attempts claiming this wasn’t the Constitution are now blown out of the water. Back comes the flag, the anthem and the motto. It means that what was 96% of the original constitution is now 100%. Let’s not hear anymore of the `Reform Treaty`. This is the rejected EU Constitution brought back in all it’s pomp’.
…
So, no threat to sovereignty ? Well let’s consider the implications; If a Sovereign Nation State no longer controls it’s own Economy, Defence, Justice System and Home Affairs, can it truly be called a `Sovereign Nation State` any longer ? The answer is quite simply NO.
For full text link to-
We Want our Money Back!
We the People are launching a “We want our money back!” Campaign.
We will be performing a national distribution of specially printed flyers designed as an old Irish punt note. (see image)
On the reverse is a condensed explanation of what the global elite have in store for us under the Lisbon treaty and under the New World Order.
Its the perfect introduction to the truth movement and would inspire anyone to research the subject and see clearly what the Lisbon treaty is really all about.
Designed as a postcard so can be easily mailed to people. If you would like to distribute some yourself in your own area please contact us.
Alternatively you may download the flyer and print them yourself.
The printed text on the reverse side of the Irish Pound note gives readers an overview of the secret hidden agenda behind the Treaty of Lisbon.
It is the essence of our campaign against an EU Constitution that will supersede the Irish Constitution if ratified. The elites need the People to give over their power to them before ratification can take place. It was the People back in 1937 that gave themselves the Constitution and not the government. The preamble to the Irish Constitution began and ended with the following words:
“We the People” … “do hereby adopt, enact, and give to ourselves this Constitution”.
It is up to you as an individual, not to allow this precious gift to be given away. The purpose of a Constitution is to prevent government and judiciary from acting in an ultra virus manner over the People. We must use it as a tool against the first sign of tyranny. The power is vested in the People and derives from the People and ONLY the People can give it away.
The text on the reverse side of the flyer is as follows:
“The plan for a One World Govt./Orwellian New World Order is near completion. This will be achieved by merging the already existing sth.American, Asian/Pacific, European,African and nth.American Unions to form the Global Union by 2018 with a one World Currency and a reduced micro-chipped population to replace cash.
Babies are already being ‘chipped’ for ‘security’ reasons and through mandatory vaccination programs. The Euro notes already contain an RFID (Radio Frequency I.D. Chip,micro wave them and see).
The proposed new Currency for nth.America is the Amero. In 2005, Canada, Mexico and the U.S.were joined together like the E.U. and this is the cause of the orchestrated crash of the Dollar which will be replaced by the Amero and will be merged with the Euro and Sterling as a ‘Harmonizing’ process towards the Global Currency.
This has been planned by the Cartel of Private Bankers through the Federal Reserve System which was never fully ratified under the American Constitution.
The Lisbon Treaty,which IS the European Constitution is a major part of the plan as it will render the Irish Constitution, hard fought for for over 800 years, obsolete. Already our Farmers cannot farm the Land,our Fishermen cannot fish our seas,our sugar factories are gone,our sacred land in Tara is being destroyed, our natural resources have been given away to Shell in Mayo and elsewhere, we depend on overpriced substandard irradiated food imports – all this as a result of freedom eroding laws from Brussels and the family unit is constantly under severe attack, our homes are threatened by the issuing of billions of fiat money notes, enslaving the People to pay taxes and interest on money that simply- does not exist.
We the People have been Mass-tricked and Lisbon is the final trap. There IS no turning back, it is the final treaty to enslave us all. We want our country back, our homes back, our families back. We can only achieve this if we return to printing our own money as before. The Irish Pound had two real signatures, a full date, (although central) a Bank, and legal tender printed on it. The Euro has none of this. WORTHLESS.
We have little time to sink Lisbon 2 and prevent our kids from being chipped like cattle. Our forefathers left us the legacy of and protection of our Constitution. What will WE leave our OUR Children? We have the last chance to save the Irish Constitution by voting a resounding NO2LISBON2. Get involved by photocopying this message.”
WE WANT OUR MONEY BACK. WE WANT OUR COUNTRY BACK. VOTE NO TO LISBON TO SAVE THE IRISH CONSTITUTION. THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN ISSUED BY: WE THE PEOPLE.ie
http://www.wethepeople.ie/action.html
————————————————
Hi Sharon, found the above which actually contains facts that can be supported via statewatch and EU archives.
31 August 2009 11:12 AMThe Irish government’s ‘Yes to Lisbon’ glove-puppets In six weeks’ time, the Irish government will force the Irish people to vote a second time on the Lisbon Treaty. It is bad enough that any government would try to overturn the resounding No vote the Irish gave last year, but this government is in a particularly awkward position to try to do so: never in the history of independent Ireland has any government been as unpopular, indeed, as reviled, as the present Fianna Fail-Green coalition led by Brian Cowen.
Twelve years of Fianna Fail coalitions have left Ireland with the worst recession in the European Union — indeed, the economy is so bad that it actually meets the economic definition of a depression — so the voters are seething with anger against the Ministers. It appears some public relations focus group has told Mr Cowen and his colleagues what should have been obvious anyway: that if this much-hated government tries to lead the campaign for a Yes vote next month, they are likely to increase the No vote.
So instead the government has been choreographing a series of announcements by prominent Irish businessmen to come out and announce they will be supporting a Yes vote. In effect, the government are using chief executives as their political glove-puppets, saying what the ministers would say if they weren’t afraid to come out of their bunkers and face the Irish public.
The problem with that is, so far the only business leaders who have agreed to pay big money towards the Lisbon Yes campaign are men who clearly have a vested interest in sucking up the the European Commission.
For example, on August 20th, Jim O’Hara, the chief executive of Intel in Ireland — the company is a big employer, but one which has recently laid off hundreds of workers — announced his company will spend hundreds of thousands of euros to campaign for a Yes vote. He said he has the support of ‘the wider Intel corporation’ in this campaign.
Too right he does. Intel is a global corporation which is now appealing a €1.06 billion (£935m) fine imposed in May by the European Commission for anti-competitive practices. The money is frozen in a blocked bank account, pending an appeal by the company in the European Court of First Instance. The executives at Intel won’t ever touch any of that billion-plus again unless their appeal succeeds – or unless they can negotiate a lower fine with the Commission.
Then there is Michael O’Leary, the chief executive of Ryanair. Last week he called a press conference to announce the airline will spend €500,000 on campaigning for a Yes vote. Which you could call a kind of protection payment to the goodwill of the Commission: the routes and pricing for O’Leary’s airline are at the mercy of the unelected, unsackable eurocrats in Brussels.
Ryanair has even more than that at stake, though. When the former state-owned Irish airline, Aer Lingus, was sold off, Ryanair bought a shareholding of nearly 30 percent. The present chairman of Aer Lingus has raged against this as ‘grossly uncompetitive’ and ‘damaging’ to Aer Lingus. The airline is in the European courts at the moment trying to force Ryanair off its shareholder register.
Such a decision from Europe could allow another international airline to buy Ryanair’s stake in Aer Lingus, which has long haul routes and valuable slots at Heathrow. Such a new investor could offer more vigorous and more profit-damaging competition to Ryanair. So suddenly the famously tight-fisted Michael O’Leary is ready to spend half a million doing what will please the Commission and push the Yes lobby.
On and on it goes, with other businessmen assuming positions on Lisbon which will please the eurocrats. Pity them. The power of the European institutions is such now that, in order not the feel the wrath of the Commission, businessmen must become little more than supplicants petitioning for mercy and favours from the royal court at Berlaymont.
http://synonblog.dailymail.co.uk/2009/08/the-irish-governments-yes-to-lisbon-glovepuppets.html
More evidence of the Brussels racket, as Irish Euro-enthusiasts turn to business leaders
By Daniel Hannan Politics Last updated: August 31st, 2009
63 Comments Comment on this article
Here is a terrifying example of what I have called the EU’s hideous strength: its ability to make good people do bad things.
In six weeks’ time, Ireland will vote again on the European Constitution Lisbon Treaty, and Euro-enthusiasts are evidently worried about leaving the “Yes” campaign in the hands of politicians again. An eve-of-poll appeal by the four main party leaders last time did nothing to encourage support for the treaty. And, in the intervening 15 months, the stock of TDs in general – and of the Fianna Fáil government in particular – has sunk further.
Accordingly (hat-tip, Mary Ellen Synon), the Pro-Treaty Forces are wheeling out businessmen. Jim O’Hara, the chief executive of Intel in Ireland, and Michael O’Leary, who runs Ryanair, are ploughing hundreds of thosands of euros into a campaign where supporters of Lisbon already enjoy a ten to one financial advantage.
What has made them do it? Why, in particular, did Michael O’Leary, who once described the EU as “the evil empire”, reverse his position? His four stated reasons for recommending a “Yes” vote make no sense at all: all are defences of the status quo, and none has anything to do with Lisbon (see here). Indeed, when he was asked at the press conference what good Lisbon would do, he replied tetchily: “I’m not going to get into explaining the European treaty, go read it yourself”.
O’Leary’s problem is that Ryanair depends on the EU for its survival. It was the Commission’s decision to block his airline’s grants from small airports and business consortia that provoked his “evil empire” remark in the first place. His current plans to take over parts of Aer Lingus will also require EU approval. He would be a brave man indeed to risk alienating Brussels. (Not that his supposed Euro-enthusiasm will necessarily save him: he should read Atlas Shrugged).
It’s a similar story when it comes to Intel, which is currently appealing against a billion euro fine imposed by the Commission.
In fact, the more I study the EU, the more I come to realise how many of its supporters have a financial stake in its survival. The head of Ireland in Europe, which is co-ordinating the “Yes” campaign, is Pat Cox, a former President of the European Parliament who, since he lost his seat, has taken over two Brussels lobbying operations as well as being a special adviser to a European Commissioner (hat-tip Open Europe). And as for the Irish MEPs who will be campaigning in favour… oh, you get the picture.
It’s the same in every country. The EU, this blog never tires of pointing out, has lost whatever ideological motive it began with, and become a racket: a way of redistributing resources from the people who don’t work for it to the people who do.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100008040/more-evidence-of-the-brussels-racket-as-irish-euro-enthusiasts-turn-to-business-leaders/
re: What is your opinion of the Lisbon Treaty I’m writing you from Germany and we all hope you have success by stopping the EU Treaty! And I hope you can forgive my miserable English, too.
We don’t have a right on a referendum and though our best wishes are with you and your campaigns. In all over Europe the people standing close to another for stopping this unholy thing called EU Treaty. We all know about the consequences and now it is time to build bridges between the people all over Europe.
This is the Europe of the European People and not the Europe of the European Industry and Warlords.
Here in Germany, Austria, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway and some other countries people go out on the streets for standing against our Governments.
Take a look here: http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=5sIgyX0jeuI&feature=related
Although there is a legal accusation against members of the German government, including chancellor Angela Merkel and president Köhler and others, because of high treason.
That is because the government, incl. chancellor Merkel and all of her ministers, are handing over the national souvereignity of Germany to an undemocratic organisation calling itself the European Union.
This governmental action is forbidden by the German Grundgesetz in several articles.
High Treason in our law is defined as “ using violence to remove the democratic organisation of the state.” The Merkel Administration uses its power over the state media – and their associated private media corporations, such as Bertelsmann corporation , Springer Verlag and others – to silence the democratic opposition against the EU Treaty of Lisboa and to deconstruct the democratic German state and replacing it by a nondemocratic organisation serving economic interests of a few corporations only – but not the peoples interests and their legal democratic rights.
The abuse of media power and the silencing of the legal opposition in the media of the state is, in the opinion of the informers of the state prosecutor, violence.
In fact no country of the forthcoming EU totalitarism will have any significant or fundamental rights to reign itself through the will of the People. But the will of the people is the fundamental of every democracy. It is ignored by the EU and, as far as Germany is concerned, the German government, too. You can follow the links at the end of this text to read about the concerned laws and the charge because of high treason in Geman.
5/8/2008 9:05 PM | Stephan Schmitt
Wednesday, September 2, 2009 Court challenge to legality of ballot TREATY CASE: A cattleman has told a High Court judge he intends challenging the legality of the Government’s new referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.
John Burke, of Duncummin House, Emly, Co Tipperary, was granted leave by Mr Justice Liam McKechnie yesterday to serve short notice on the Taoiseach, the Minister for Justice and the State of his intended challenge.
Mr Burke will be allowed to put his case tomorrow for leave to bring a judicial review of the forthcoming referendum.
He told the High Court judge he believed the Irish electorate had on June 12th, 2008, cast their vote in a referendum in which the result was a definite No.
“That vote still stands and the Taoiseach has since told the electorate they have been misinformed and that they will have to vote until such time as they decide to vote the opposite,” Mr Burke told the court.
He said the Taoiseach had admitted he had not read the text of the treaty. Mr Burke said the Taoiseach had told the electorate that if they voted again he would assure them that certain crucial issues, which would affect the well-being and stability of Ireland for generations to come, would be legally dismissed from the treaty.
He had told the electorate they would effectively be voting on an amended treaty to that which they had already rejected.
He said that by imposing a second vote on the Irish people, the Taoiseach was in direct breach of his duty to uphold the Constitution which could not co-exist with the Lisbon Treaty. Mr Burke wants the original vote to be declared as passed and the forthcoming referendum to be declared unconstitutional.
Mr Burke told the court he was seeking a judicial review of the Government’s October 2nd referendum on the grounds that no means no and that no written evidence of legal changes to the treaty had been put before the electorate.
This article appears in the print edition of the Irish Times
Czech senators file complaint against Lisbon treaty-related bills Prague – Seventeen Czech senators, mainly from the right-wing Civic Democrats (ODS), today filed a complaint with the Constitutional Court against the amendments “on special mandate” related to the Lisbon treaty, ODS senator Jiri Oberfalzer has told CTK. The special mandate prevents the Czech government from approving transfer of powers to the EU without the parliament’s agreement.
Apart from ODS senators, the complaint was signed by unaffiliated senator Tomas Toepfer and Liana Janackova, chairwoman for the Party of Free Citizens.
The senators also plan to ask the Constitutional Court again to assess the the Lisbon treaty to reform the EU institutions as such.
The senators’ initiative has been criticised by supporters of a quick ratification of the treaty who say this step is just delaying tactics that would enable President Vaclav Klaus to postpone the signing of the treaty and thus its final ratification.
Klaus is known as a staunch critic of the Lisbon treaty.
Minister for European Affairs Stefan Fuele recently called the senators’ efforts “an unsubstantiated and illogical step” that should not hamper the ratification process.
However, the senators argue that the amendments on the special mandate are not sufficient and that it is at variance with the constitution for the houses of parliament to approve further transfers of power to the EU by less than a constitutional majority.
The senators called on the Constitutional Court to apply the final right to interpret the European legislation related to the Lisbon treaty. They also propose that parliament approve Czech candidates for EU commissioner and judges of the European Court of Justice.
The treaty’s opponents among senators turned to the Constitutional Court already in 2008. Last November the court said it did not find the treaty inconsistent with the Czech constitutional order.
Both houses of Czech parliament have passed the Lisbon treaty. Now Klaus is to sign it to complete the ratification process.
Klaus said he would wait for the Constitutional Court’s decision of the new complaint first. He said previously he would like to be the last in Europe to decide on the treaty, after the final step in the ratification process is taken by Ireland, Poland and Germany.
The Lisbon treaty must be ratified by all 27 member states to come into force.
http://www.ceskenoviny.cz/news/zpravy/czech-senators-file-complaint-against-lisbon-treaty-related-bills/395447
September 02, 2009
“No real debate about the Lisbon Treaty could happen. This was a deliberate decision”
Countries, when they democratically reject EU treaties, are usually told to vote again until they produce the “right” result – something the EU establishment hope will happen in the re-run Irish constitutional referendum on the Lisbon Treaty taking place exactly a month today.
The Irish political establishment are almost unanimous in their support for the document; the leaders of Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and Labour all enthusiastically calling for its speedy passage into law.
Any impartial observer will tell you that the Lisbon Treaty is no different in composition from the document – the Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe – democratically rejected by the people of France and the Netherlands in national referenda.
Much of their argument in favour of accepting the ‘revised’ Lisbon Treaty centres around the supposed “concessions” the country has won – chiefly, the ability to retain its European Commissioner and domestic control of laws governing social issues such as sensitive aspects of medical research. I use the word “supposed” advisedly, as these concessions are nothing more than oral promises to the Irish government from other European countries as their formal incorporation into the Treaty would require the ratification process to start afresh in the twenty-three countries (including the United Kingdom) who have already given their ascent to the document.
As with the previous referendum, opposition is being coordinated by an unappealing alliance of Sinn Féin Teachtaí Dála and far-left radicals such as Dublin’s self-proclaimed Marxist MEP Joe Higgins. The “no” campaign expects to be outspent by a margin of more than ten-to-one.
Irish referendum aside, a clever question from European Conservative and Reformist Group MEP Nirj Deva at the approval hearing being held for incoming Development Commissioner Karel du Gucht yesterday afternoon neatly surmises the wholly deceptive nature of the EU establishment towards the implementation of the European Constitution.
Addressing de Gucht directly and reiterating the British Conservative call for a referendum on the Treaty, Deva said:
“A referendum would really bring “Europe closer to its citizens” but the governments of Europe reneged on the promise when they thought they would lose. You are reported as saying to Flanders Info in a 2007 interview: “The aim of the Constitutional Treaty was to be more readable; the aim of [the Lisbon] treaty is to be unreadable… The Constitution aimed to be clear, whereas this treaty had to be unclear. It is a success”. How do you square that “success” with your desiring of a “Europe closer to its citizens”?”
De Gucht, who is clearly not well-versed in the often-used (in Britain at least) argument from Labour politicians that the Treaty involved no “fundamental change” in the division of EU/member state competences and thus requires no referendum, responded to Deva’s point with refreshing honesty:
“Whilst the original Constitutional Treaty was technical, and correct, people didn’t read the Lisbon Treaty, they didn’t understand the first word about it. No real debate about the Lisbon Treaty could happen. This was a deliberate decision of the European Council”.
So there we have it, from the horse’s mouth: the EU elite are deliberately trying to bamboozle the people of Europe into accepting the Lisbon Treaty.
Outrageous? Yes. Surprising? No.
Posted by Daniel Hamilton at 02:03 |
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/centreright/2009/09/no-real-debate-about-the-lisbon-treaty-could-happen-this-was-a-deliberate-decision.html
McKenna threatens court action over ‘partisan’ booklet
By Aine Kerr Political Correspondent
Wednesday September 02 2009
ANTI-LISBON Treaty campaigner Patricia McKenna is considering a legal challenge against the independent referendum watchdog.
But last night the former Green Party MEP refused to reveal the identity of the lawyers who told her the Referendum Commission’s information campaign on the referendum is promoting a ‘Yes’ vote.
The People’s Movement chairwoman claimed an information booklet on the Lisbon Treaty from the body is “evasive”, “inaccurate” and “misleading” and must be changed or withdrawn immediately.
The Commission is chaired by High Court judge Frank Clarke, backed up by the clerk of the Dail, clerk of the Seanad, Ombudsman, and Comptroller and Auditor General.
According to Ms McKenna, the booklet entitled “The Lisbon Treaty — Your Guide”, which has been distributed to households countrywide, is designed to achieve a ‘Yes’ vote.
“This document which the voters believe to be balanced and non-partisan is one of the most disturbing aspects of the campaign to date,” she said.
She said her legal advisers are experts on Irish constitutional law and are agreed on the need to withdraw the booklet.
Ms McKenna, who resigned from the Green Party earlier this year, said it fails to point out that Ireland’s vote in the Council of Ministers decreases by over 50pc.
The booklet also fails to mention the loss of the veto, which means moving to majority voting in a whole range of new policy areas.
“These two changes are of crucial importance but the Referendum Commission has basically ignored them,” Ms McKenna said last night.
Rejecting the accusations, a spokeswoman for the Commission said: “The information in the booklet is accurate and unbiased as required by law.”
– Aine Kerr Political Correspondent
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/mckenna-threatens-court-action-over-partisan-booklet-1875174.html
———————————————————–
Hi Sharon, you will have noted there currently exists one legal challange to the Lisbon treaty and one or more other possible legal challanges to said treaty in Ireland. I recall such a challange on Referendum in Britain against Brown who failed to honour his manifesto promise. It will be interesting to see how the Irish courts deal with the matter. I also noted the EU Yes campaign are throwing everything at the Irish, and given the extent of EU involvement to acquire the vote they want using any means necessary, the NO campaign certainly have its work cut out for them. However, in saying that, the NO campaign are doing very well under the circumstances, so well in fact that even the punters see it as to close to call. Good luck. Regards.
Leaked Agenda of the Bilderberg Group Meeting ’09
…
Estulin’s sources also tell him that Bilderberg will again attempt to push for the enactment of the Lisbon Treaty, a key centerpiece of the agenda to fully entrench a federal EU superstate, by forcing the Irish to vote again on the document in September/October despite having rejected it already, along with other European nations, in national referendums.
“One of their concerns is addressing and neutralizing the anti-Lisbon treaty movement called ‘Libertas’ led by Declan Ganley. One of the Bilderberger planned moves is to use a whispering campaign in the US media suggested that Ganley is being funded by arms dealers in the US linked to the US military,” reports CFP.
Daniel Estulin, Jim Tucker, and other sources who have infiltrated Bilderberg meetings in the past have routinely provided information about the Bilderberg agenda that later plays out on the world stage, proving that the organization is not merely a “talking shop” as debunkers claim, but an integral planning forum for the new world order agenda.
http://www.wariscrime.com/2009/05/07/news/leaked-agenda-of-the-bilderberg-group-meeting-2009/
Statement from TEEU on Lisbon Treaty Referendum
in Charter of Fundamental Rights,Press-Release
Statement from TEEU on Lisbon Treaty Referendum
Press Conference Wednesday September 2nd 2009.
Verification: Frank Keoghan 087-2308330
The TEEU reiterates its opposition to the Lisbon Treaty, a position unanimously endorsed by our last delegate conference. Our opposition to the first referendum was clearly based on opposition to the policy of the ECJ in interpreting the Treaties and in particular the Posting of Workers Directive in a manner detrimental to the long-term interests of our members.
Since the rejection of the Lisbon Treaty by the Irish electorate last June, the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) called for a Social Protocol to address this situation. The TEEU supported this position and furthermore, sought to have it attached to the Lisbon Treaty when it became obvious that we were to vote again. We are aware that John Monks, General Secretary of the ETUC met Mr Barroso in May of this year and that there was no progress in this regard. We can only conclude in these circumstances that the incremental diminution of worker’s rights in successive judgements of the ECJ has the support of the Commission. This is totally unacceptable.
It was also clear to the government following the Millward Brown survey commissioned by them post – referendum that this was a major issue contributing to the Treaty’s rejection. Nevertheless, the best they and the June Summit of EU leaders could offer is ‘special recognition’ of the issue – implying that what has been happening has their approval.
Unfortunately, the Lisbon Treaty will ensure that the ‘interest of the market’ will always have precedence over the rights of workers, as it grants the Charter of Fundamental Rights the same legal standing as the Treaty and a number of judgements of the ECJ enshrining the principle of market primacy are included in the explanations which must be taken into account by the Courts when ruling in such cases.
Another significant development since the last referendum is the Luxembourg Ruling. Commenting on the ruling, John Monks, general secretary of the European Trade Union Confederation, stated: This is another hugely problematic judgement by the ECJ, asserting the primacy of the economic freedoms over fundamental rights and respect for national labour law and collective agreements. It turns the Posting Directive from an instrument that was intended to protect workers, companies and labour markets against unfair competition on wages and working conditions into an aggressive internal market tool. This is unacceptable and must be repaired as soon as possible by the European legislators, notably by a revision of the Posting Directive to clarify and safeguard its original meaning. In addition, the ETUC urges the European institutions to adopt a Social Progress protocol . . ..
The Labour Court also echoed our concerns earlier this year when it stated, in a case brought by employers in an attempt to break a Registered Employment Agreement (REA) that; .it seems reasonably if not absolutely clear to the Court that in the absence of a Registered Employment Agreement contractors from other Member States could exercise their freedom to provide services in this jurisdiction under the EC Treaty at the same rates and conditions of employment as apply in their country of origin. Depending on the country of origin this could seriously undermine the competitive position of Irish contractors or more likely, the wages of their employees! This is a clear and explicit recognition by the Court that a race to the bottom based particularly on the Laval and Rueffert Judgements is now a pending possibility especially as the employers are likely to pursue this case through the civil courts, with devastating results for our members if they are successful.
The only way to stop this process it is to reject Lisbon yet again and ensure that in any renegotiation, a social protocol is attached and that the Posting of Workers Directive and Charter of Fundamental rights are amended to give worker’s rights primacy over the interests of the market. Then, the TEEU will reconsider its position.
Frank Keoghan, General President.
Eamon Devoy, General Secretary Designate.
Lisbon Treaty undermines jobs, pay and conditions
in Charter of Fundamental Rights,Press-Release
Campaign Against EU Constitution – SayNo.ie
Press Statement 2/9/09
For Immediate release
Lisbon Treaty undermines jobs, pay and conditions
Charter will not protect European workers
No reason for SIPTU to support the Treaty
A group of trade unions today called on Irish workers to reject the Lisbon Treaty. They said that despite the negotiations by the Irish Government, nothing has changed in the Treaty since it was rejected in June 2008.
Workers pay and conditions have come under attack from the rulings of the European Court of Justice(ECJ). The Laval, Viking, Ruffert and Luxemburg rulings have restricted the right to take action to prevent transnational contractors using cheap labour; and overruled national laws and agreements on pay and conditions. In all cases, the right to operate a profitable business across borders has been given priority over workers rights. Lisbon, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights, would not change this anti-worker tendency.
The European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) believe that a social progress clause is necessary to stop further ECJ rulings which undermine the right to enforce collective agreements, including the right to take strike action.
The outcome of the Irish negotiations have been described by the General Secretary of the ETUC as intensely disappointing. He said “The outcome of the negotiations of the does not adequately address the needs of the workers in Europe or in Ireland”.
This is not surprising given the neo-liberal thrust of the Lisbon Treaty and its emphasis on the free movement of persons, good, services and capital. The Treaty commits us to an internal market where “competition is not distorted”. It also promotes the privatisation of public services and the same neo-liberal policies which have created the economic crisis. The disciplines imposed by the Stability and Growth Pact will lead to deep cuts in public services, as Colm McCarthy admits.
Some trade unionists have argued that putting the Charter of Fundamental Rights into Treaty law will enhance the rights of workers, particularly the right to bargain. We believe that the claims made for the Charter are not sustainable.
Firstly, there is nothing in the Charter of Fundamental Rights that would guarantee the right to trade union recognition. The rights in the Charter to collective bargaining and action are subject to national laws and practices. The right to collective bargaining would not apply in Ireland, given the absence of this right in Irish Legislation.
During the last referendum campaign SIPTU refused to endorse the Treaty until the government legislated for collective bargaining rights. The government have not done so. We are therefore calling on SIPTU to oppose the Treaty.
Secondly, and more fundamentally, the rights contained in the Charter are subject to limitations flowing from the rules of the single market. The Charter was taken into consideration by the judges of the ECJ in the Laval case. In this case the judges ruled that the trade unions’ collective action constituted a restriction on the freedom to provide services across the EU (Art 49).
It has been argued that giving the Charter legal force will ensure workers rights are given equal weight in decisions by the ECJ. Giving the Charter legal status will not override the right to provide cross-border services in the EU. This was made clear by Commissioner Wallstrom in October 2007 when she said that ECJ case law would not be “affected in any way by making the Charter legally binding”.
It is also clear in the rulings of the ECJ that the ‘principle of proportionality’ requires that the exercise of fundamental rights, including the right to strike, must not disrupt the right to do business across the borders of EU countries – one of the four freedoms guaranteed by the EU.
This is why the ETUC have called for an additional clause giving priority to workers rights. The Lisbon Treaty would prioritise the rights of business, facilitate outsourcing and accelerate the race to the bottom. It should be rejected by all those concerned about workers rights.
Ends.
Further information and comment:
Brendan Young 085 713 1903 Eddie Conlon 087 677 5468
Notes for Journalists:
1. The Legal Status of the Charter
Giving the Charter legal status will not change its standing. This was made clear by Commission vice-president Margot Wallstrom in October 2007 when she said in a reply to a questioning the European Parliament:
“As regards the relationship between fundamental rights and the four fundamental freedoms (free movement of persons, goods, services, and capital), the [ECJ] has developed clear principles. In the Commission’s view, this case-law will not be affected in any way by making the Charter legally binding.”
2. The Charter and the Laval Case
In the Laval judgment the Charter was taken into account by the EJC. In para.90 of the judgement it is acknowledged that the right to take collective action is recognised in the Charter but in para 91 it says:
“Although the right to take collective action must therefore be recognised as a fundamental right…the exercise of that right may none the less be subject to certain restrictions. As is reaffirmed by Article 28 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, it is to be protected in accordance with Community law and national law and practices.”
Para 94 says that when exercising the right to take collective action “Such exercise must be reconciled with the requirements relating to rights protected under the Treaty and in accordance with the principles of proportionality”
3. Restriction on Fundamental Rights in the Charter
Explanation on Article 52 — Scope and interpretation of rights and principles
The purpose of Article 52 is to set the scope of the rights and principles of the Charter, and to lay down rules for their interpretation. Paragraph 1 deals with the arrangements for the limitation of rights. The wording is based on the case-law of the Court of Justice: ‘… it is well established in the case-law of the Court that restrictions may be imposed on the exercise of fundamental rights, in particular in the context of a common organisation of the market, provided that those restrictions in fact correspond to objectives of general interest pursued by the Community and do not constitute, with regard to the aim pursued, disproportionate and unreasonable interference undermining the very substance of those rights’ (judgment of 13 April 2000, Case C-292/97, paragraph 45 of the grounds). The reference to general interests recognised by the Union covers both the objectives mentioned in Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union and other interests protected by specific provisions of the Treaties such as Article 4(1) of the Treaty on European Union and Articles 35(3), 36 and 346 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
4. Social Progress Clause
The social progress clause would mean that fundamental rights would have higher status in EU law than the right to do business in the internal market. The ETUC has drafted a proposed protocol incorporating the social progress clause. Article 3 of the draft clearly states the effect of the clause:
Article 3
(The relation between fundamental rights and economic freedoms)
(1) Nothing in the Treaties, and in particular neither economic freedoms nor competition rules shall have priority over fundamental social rights and social progress as defined in Article 2. In case of conflict fundamental social rights shall take precedence.
Article 2 commits the EU to ensuring
“the effective exercise of the fundamental social rights and principles, and in
particular the right to negotiate, conclude and enforce collective agreements and to take collective action,”
Hi phoenix.one.uk !
“Hi Sharon, you will have noted there currently exists one legal challange to the Lisbon treaty and one or more other possible legal challanges to said treaty in Ireland. I recall such a challange on Referendum in Britain against Brown who failed to honour his manifesto promise. It will be interesting to see how the Irish courts deal with the matter. I also noted the EU Yes campaign are throwing everything at the Irish, and given the extent of EU involvement to acquire the vote they want using any means necessary, the NO campaign certainly have its work cut out for them. However, in saying that, the NO campaign are doing very well under the circumstances, so well in fact that even the punters see it as to close to call. Good luck. Regards.”
And we’ll need it ! There seems to be at least one well-funded ‘Yes’ organisation popping-up here every day – and each of them welcomed by a media blitz. We haven’t got the same funding or media access behind us , but we ‘little people’ are well used to that!
Thanks!
Sharon.
Denmark: Court to decide on Lisbon Treaty
politikin.dk ^ | 8/28/2009 | Edited by Julian Isherwood
Posted on 29 August 2009 08:56:07 by bruinbirdman
The Eastern High Court is to hear arguments today on whether a case brought by 38 Danes against the prime and foreign ministers for failing to send the EU’s Lisbon Treaty to referendum, is at all relevant.
Irrespective of whether the court finds in favour of the petitioners or the ministers, both sides have said they will appeal to the Supreme Court if the court finds against them.
Constitution The petitioners claim that the Lisbon Treaty should have been sent to referendum under paragraph 20 of the Danish Constitution as they claim the treaty is a constitution in disguise and represents a devolution of sovereignty.
Junior Counsel to the Treasury Peter Biering, who represents the two ministers, has chosen to contest the relevance of the case. Legal counsel to the government has maintained that the Treaty did not require a referendum.
Given the decision by both parties to appeal the court’s decision on relevance, a court case is unlikely to be heard in the Eastern High Court on the core issue of the case until 2011 – provided that an eventual appeal in the Supreme Court finds the case to be relevant.
Paragraph 20 of the Danish Constitution reads as follows:
(1) Powers vested in the authorities of the Realm under this Constitutional Act may, to such extent as shall be provided by statute, be delegated to international authorities set up by mutual agreement with other states for the promotion of international rules of law and cooperation.
(2) For the enactment of a Bill dealing with the above, a majority of five-sixths of the members of the Folketing shall be required. If this majority is not obtained, whereas the majority required for the passing of ordinary Bills is obtained, and if the Government maintains it, the Bill shall be submitted to the electorate for approval or rejection in accordance with the rules for referenda laid down in section 42.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2327285/posts
Wednesday, 2nd September 2009 – 13:49CET
Ryanair gives free seats for a Yes to Europe Irish voteRyanair has today released 1 million ‘Yes to Europe’ free seats for travel in October and November urging Irish passengers to vote ‘Yes to Europe’ on October 2.
These free fares are available on more than 500 European routes but must be booked before midnight tomorrow.
Free fares from Malta are for Pisa and Trapani.
Ryanair’s ‘Yes to Europe’ free seats include all taxes and charges.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20090902/local/ryanair-gives-free-seats-for-a-yes-to-europe-irish-vote
Comment quotes: Not even Adolf Hitler would have come up with such an idea for propaganda. It shows that in the EU democracy is becoming a farce. We cannot blame any longer the Arabs for not having democracy. M Brincat
Robert Scullion
It is bribery and with any luck and God’s help the Irish will again vote NO to send the message to the arrogant eu petty dictators that NO means NO and send the Lisbon Treaty and the eu to the dustbin of history to where they belong together with their supporters.
My comment. Want a ticket to fly anyone?
Thursday, September 3, 2009 Irish homes to get UK leaflets on ‘open door’ to immigrantsJAMIE SMYTH and MARY MINIHAN THE UK Independence Party (UKIP) will send a leaflet to every Irish home urging a No vote in the Lisbon Treaty to close an “open door” to immigrants.
It will also argue that the final decision on sensitive ethical issues such as abortion and euthanasia will pass from Irish to European courts if the treaty is ratified.
British MEP and UKIP leader Nigel Farage said: “With the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which is justiciable at the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, it will no longer be your Supreme Court that takes decisions on really hot and contentious issues.” He added the European court had a record of “political activism”.
Mr Farage, who is a trenchant critic of the EU, described the Government’s guarantees on the treaty as “laughable”.
He said UKIP had decided to get involved in the Lisbon referendum campaign because the “No side seemed to be a bit thin on the ground, and someone needed to redress the balance”.
UKIP, which won the second biggest vote in the recent European elections in Britain, has 13 MEPs. It is the biggest party in the newly- formed Europe of Freedom of Democracy group within the European Parliament.
Mr Farage said it would cost more than €100,000 to fund the leaflet drop and other campaign activities in Ireland. The Europe of Freedom of Democracy group would provide the cash for the campaign even though the parliamentary group does not contain a single Irish MEP.
Mr Farage, who rejected any suggestion that UKIP’s involvement in an Irish referendum was political interference, added: “We are not the Tories, for Christ sake. We are not the party that governed Ireland and fought tooth and nail against the creation of a free state and all the rest of it. We are unashamedly a pro-British party but that doesn’t make us anti-Irish.”
One of the most controversial arguments in the campaign leaflets which will be sent to Irish homes in the next few weeks is a claim that the Lisbon Treaty will open the door to immigration.
“I suspect no one else would touch this issue with a barge pole but we will deal with it in an utterly responsible way,” said Mr Farage, who added that UKIP was not in any way racist and had five black or Asian candidates in the recent European elections.
Mr Farage will travel to Ireland next Tuesday to attend a debate on the treaty in Dublin.
Another UKIP MEP, Marta Andreasen, was in Dublin yesterday to launch the NO to Lisbon 2 campaign.
Ms Andreasen, a former European Commission chief accountant, said the EU was giving “no help at all” to member states in the current economic crisis.
“Ireland has had many economic policies that have helped the country grow until 2002 without the help of the European Union,” she said.
Ms Andreasen, an Argentinian-born Spaniard, said she was dismissed from her former job for going public with concerns about accounting systems. “I have seen what happens within the walls of the European Union, and out of that experience I wouldn’t like my children to be ruled by this political elite in Brussels.”
Hi Sharon, polls show the NO campaign are closing the gap.Hang in there.
Quote: Friday, September 4, 2009, 17:12 Martin admits Lisbon challengeMinister for Foreign Affairs Micheál Martin today admitted the Government faces a tough battle to get the Lisbon Treaty ratified in the upcoming October 2nd referendum after the latest Irish Times/TNS mrbi poll showed support for the treaty has declined over the summer.
However, the Yes side is still in the lead with four weeks to go to the referendum, according to the poll, which shows that 46 per cent would vote Yes, a drop of eight points since the last Irish Times poll in May, while 29 per cent say they would vote No, an increase of one point. The number of people in the Don’t Know category has increased by seven points to 25 per cent.
I came across an article in Irish Times today, which I believe supports much of what has been debated. The people of Europe do not support the Lisbon treaty, and I am sure most are praying for Ireland to repeat their NO vote loud and clear for the EU. Maybe even draw it in crayon so they will understand NO means NO.
Anyway, quote:
Saturday, September 5, 2009 No vote urged by German, Greek, French, US activistsSHANNON PROTEST: LEFT-WING ACTIVISTS and anti-Lisbon Treaty campaigners from several EU member states will gather at Shannon airport today to put forward their arguments against the treaty and voice their opposition to closer co-operation between the EU and Nato.
Among the speakers at today’s gathering are: Socialist Party MEP Joe Higgins; former Sinn Féin MEP Mary Lou McDonald; Cllr Richard Boyd Barrett, chair of the Irish Anti-War Movement; and former MEP Patricia McKenna of the People’s Movement.
At a press conference yesterday, former German MEP Tobias Pfluger described the Lisbon Treaty as promoting a “militaristic, neo-liberal” agenda that would “change the EU absolutely”.
Reiner Braun, a German lawyer and activist, agreed. “Ireland is our hope that militarism will not be the future for Europe,” he said. “This is a battle for Europe, not against Europe.” Similar views were aired by French, Greek and American activists present.
Ms McDonald predicted Irish neutrality would again play a major role in the referendum
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0905/1224253907898.html
The Silenced British Majority
6 September 2009
By Phoenix One UK
The United Kingdom, a nation, does not belong to governments, it belongs to their people. No government possess a mandate or the right to surrender control of a sovereign nation to a foreign power without a mandate from the people. To do so would be treason.
Of the 27 member states of the EU, only Ireland was constitutionally bound and given a referendum on the Lisbon treaty, twice. Almost all the EU member states have endorsed the treaty through votes in their national parliaments, but only Ireland allowed its people to either endorse or reject the treaty. It had been left to the Irish people to decide the fate of Europe and all the Europeans who reside within.
The British people are angry, and rightly so, to see their nation betrayed by our own governments. I for one cannot even go into town without seeing the EU flag flying high outside one place of business with the British flag nowhere in sight. I hear the Prime Minister and MP’s speak of British pride and resolve, but I see very little evidence they share such pride and resolve other than to use it to dismantle and destroy our great nation.
The freedom and hopes of Europe rests with the Irish people, Vaclav Klaus, the Czech president, and political parties like UKIP to expose the Lisbon treaty for what it is and kill it.
The Lisbon treaty re-run on 2 October 2009 is not just an Irish battle for democracy in Ireland; it is a battle for democracy throughout Europe. The EU is not Europe, it is an organisation consisting of an elite class who want to control and rule Europe, and it is a dictatorship.
I included a number of links on my blog site (given below) for any and all who wish to investigate and explore allegations made. The links include neutral sites and even the EU itself.
Best wishes and good luck to the Irish NO campaign.
Phoenix One UK – http://phoenixoneuk.blogspot.com/
August 28, 2009
Voting until they get it right in the European Union
When it comes to the European Union, any vote to increase authority in Brussels is viewed as final. Any vote against consolidating power is treated as merely temporary. The Lisbon Treaty is the perfect example of such a power grab. Among other things, it shifts responsibilities from national parliaments to European parliament, reduces the number of areas where unanimity is required (eliminating national vetoes), creates a president as a person (as opposed to rotating presidencies for nations), and creates a foreign minister to push a continental foreign policy. In June 2008, Ireland voted against the treaty. Since the agreement requires unanimous agreement, the referendum theoretically killed the attempt. However, the European elite insisted that Ireland vote again. Dublin will hold a revote on October 2.
Read article by Doug Bandow in the Washington Examiner (USA)
Monday, April 21, 2008
Lisbon Treaty introduces EU-wide death penalty
Helga Zepp-LaRouche is no-one that Cranmer has ever heard of, but she is chair(wo)man of the German political party Civil Rights Solidarity Movement (BüSo). She spoke recently on the EU’s Lisbon Treaty, and drew attention by analysis by one Professor Schachtschneider, who is also not someone with whom Cranmer is acquainted.
However, it appears that the Treaty of Lisbon reintroduces the death penalty in Europe, which Helga Zepp-LaRouche thinks is ‘very important’ (just a bit), ‘in light of the fact that Italy was trying to abandon the death penalty through the United Nations, forever. And this is not in the treaty, but in a footnote, because with the European Union reform treaty, we accept also the European Union Charter, which says that there is no death penalty, and then it has a footnote, which says, “except in the case of war, riots, upheaval”—then the death penalty is possible. Schachtschneider points to the fact that this is an outrage, because they put it in a footnote of a footnote, and you have to read it, like really like a super-expert to find out!’
Cranmer has not bothered to check this footnote to a footnote, not least because, although he has never heard of Helga Zepp-LaRouche or Professor Schachtschneider, he is inclined to trust them impeccably against the scheming and manipulating liars in Brussels.
Let us not forget that the Union is acquiring the legal authority to ‘provide itself with the means necessary to attain its objectives and carry through its policies’, which means raising its ‘own resources’ to finance them, which may be regarded as conferring on it revenue-raising powers, which will eventually be subject to QMV instead of unanimity. But it may also be the authority to crush any opposition, especially that which does not accord with its ‘objectives’.
The European Union not only possesses such symbols of statehood as its own flag, anthem, motto and annual official holiday. It now has its own government, with a legislature, executive and judiciary, its own President, its own citizens and citizenship, its own human and civil rights code, its own currency, economic policy and revenue, its own international treaty-making powers, foreign policy, foreign minister, diplomatic corps and United Nations voice, its own crime and justice code and Public Prosecutor.
And the citizens of the Union now owe allegiance to that Union, and to its aims and ‘objectives’, even though no-one in the UK has any idea what these objectives may be.
Buy Cranmer thinks it noteworthy that the death penalty is reintroduced for political offences, even as vague and undefined as ‘unrest’, but not for serial killers, rapists, paedophiles or child murderers.
One wonders why…
posted by Archbishop Cranmer –
http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/2008/04/lisbon-treaty-introduces-eu-wide-death.html
PANA claims Lisbon threatens neutrality Monday, 7 September 2009 22:38 The Peace and Neutrality Alliance has accused Fianna Fáil of destroying the economy and Irish neutrality.
Launching the group’s campaign for a No vote in the Lisbon Treaty referendum, PANA chairman Roger Cole rejected comments by Minister for Defence Willie O’Dea stating that neutrality is safe under the Lisbon Treaty.
Mr Cole said the reality is that neutrality ‘is as safe as the Irish economy has been under Fianna Fáil’.
He said the Lisbon Treaty states that EU mutual defence ‘shall be consistent with the mutual defence of a nuclear armed military alliance’.
PANA say that well over 1m US troops have used Shannon Airport on their way to the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan.
‘Such use is in contravention of the 1907 Hague Convention, which defines in international law the duties and responsibilities of neutral states,’ the organisation says.
PANA claims that this situation means Ireland has not been a neutral state ‘since February 2003′.
Mr Cole said if PANA is given the space to democratically debate the facts, then the No vote will be even greater on 2 October than in last year’s referendum.
The Taoiseach was canvassing for Lisbon on the streets of New Ross in Co Wexford.
His main message was that voting Yes will help restart the economy.
However, Socialist Party MEP Joe Higgins said his party is opposing Lisbon because it does not advance workers’ rights and is skewed in favour of big business.
The People Against Profit Alliance’s No campaign was launched today by councillor Richard Boyd Barrett.
Councillors unite against Lisbon Treaty
Tuesday, September 08, 2009 – 04:07 PM
Some 135 councillors have joined forces to reject the Lisbon Treaty today, claiming it would privatise public services and create a more militarised Europe.
The politicians argued the charter would also weaken Ireland’s influence in the EU, do little to tackle climate change and make life tougher for developing countries.
The councillors, including representatives from (P)Sinn Féin, Labour and People Before Profit, are backing the Campaign Against the EU Constitution group.
Brendan Young, CAEUC spokesman, claimed workers’ rights would be eroded and public spending slashed if the treaty was passed.
“The policies of local government management involving privatisation, outsourcing and PPPs have seriously undermined the quality of essential services and community development. Lisbon would copperfasten this approach.
If passed, Lisbon would give the EU additional power to force governments to comply with all aspects of the Treaties – including the right to run a public service as a business.”
There are 1,627 councillors across the state, with this anti-Lisbon campaign representing less than 10% of elected representatives.
The Labour Party is backing the treaty and a spokeswoman said its three councillors demanding a no vote – Patrick Nulty (Dublin West), Collette Connolly (Galway) and Jane Dillon Byrne (Dun Laoghaire) were expressing personal views.
Five councillors spoke at the campaign launch including People Before Profit’s Richard Boyd-Barrett and Independent Galway councillor Catherine Connolly.
Mr Barrett accused the Referendum Commission, an independent body set up to provide information on the Treaty, of being dishonest by claiming Ireland’s neutrality would not be undermined.
“I to be honest think the Referendum Commission are being dishonest, or at least failing to acknowledge there is a dispute about this issue (EU militarisation) ,” he said.
Mr Barrett claimed the argument for a ‘No’ vote was even stronger now given the scale of the economic crisis.
Voters were also urged to question why big businesses like Intel and Ryanair were backing the treaty.
Ms Connolly, a practising barrister, said the ‘Yes’ campaign was using bullying and scare tactics to drum up support, yet never referred to specific articles in the Treaty to back up their claims.
She also claimed the treaty was deliberately difficult to understand and did nothing for women’s rights.
“I would challenge anyone to tell me that this is not a glorification of the militarisation of Europe,” Ms Connolly said.
Other councillors present at the launch were Independents Ciaran Perry and Chris O’Leary, who resigned from the Green Party in January over its work in Government, and People Before Profit’s Joan Collins.
Read more-
http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/councillors-unite-against-lisbon-treaty-425608.html#ixzz0Qc1A3h5X
Lisbon Treaty: TO THE IRISH PEOPLE :
Appréciation des utilisateurs: / 0
FaibleMeilleur Écrit par Flash-info-WLS
10-09-2009
(Traité de Lisbonne, referendum, Lisbon Treaty)Communiqué du FPF / FFITO THE IRISH PEOPLE, the answer you will give in the referendum which is again submitted to you will not only bind your country, but will determine the fate of all Nations.Far from being a straightforward treaty, this will surrender the freedom of all Peoples, and give away their sovereignty through numerous transfers to the European Union.
What will be left of your identity, of your freedom in choosing your own course, of your particular commitments, of the respect due to your loyalties, after such a treaty ?
Let no one decide in your name, you are the guardians of the most precious Common Good of all Peoples – Liberty.In 2005, through the referendum, the French and Dutch Peoples gave a resounding NO, and only a highly disputable ’legal’ subterfuge made it possible to disregard their decision.It will therefore fall to you, as a great honour, to uphold our choice – your answer will bind us. A NO would be liberating, and would allow the French, and every free person, to decide about the future of their own country and of their kin, and to reassert the value of democracy.
“We shall never resign, we shall never surrender, we shall fight…”
Hearing these words, remembered by all with pride and emotion, we say : “Ireland, YOUR NO IS OURS. IRELAND FOR EVER” has resounded with your first vote – tomorrow, may You, the Irish People, grant us this liberation. This NO will be the Founding Voice, the fate of every People is and must remain within the Nation.Forum pour la France (26 associations), Henri Fouquereau, General Secretary
Forum Francophone International-FFI-France, Albert Salon, former Ambassador
Contact –
http://www.webtelelibre.levillage.org/content/view/1558/35/
September 3, 2009
Irish prime minister still confused on Lisbon
Twenty-nine days until the Irish are forced to vote again on Lisbon, and the Irish prime minister still can’t give more than muddled answers about what is in the treaty. Yesterday the Taoiseach, Brian Cowen, launched his party’s campaign for a Yes vote, and insisted again that he had read all 306 pages of the treaty. But when an Irish Daily Mail reporter asked him how Lisbon would affect employment policy in Ireland, Mr Cowen could only give a rambling reply that never answered the question.
Read Mary Ellen Synon’s blog entry on the Daily Mail website (UK)
(Comment: As Mary Ellen Synon correctly identifies in her blog, ratification of the Lisbon Treaty by Ireland would result in employment policies being taken out of the hands of Irish business, Irish trade unions, and the Irish government and placed instead into the hands of EU institutions.)
How the Irish Can Save Civilization (Again)
Just say no to the Lisbon Treaty. Again.
By BRIAN M. CARNEY
In three weeks’ time, Ireland will, for a moment, hold the fate of Europe in its hands. Through a quirk of Irish constitutional procedure, on Oct. 2 the Republic of Ireland will be the only European Union nation to hold a referendum on a treaty to revamp how the EU, home to half a billion people, does business. The Lisbon Treaty, therefore, will stand or fall on the votes of perhaps one and a half million Irishmen and women.
From the perspective of Brussels, this is grossly unfair—a miscarriage of democracy masquerading as democracy. The Irish have stymied the denizens of Brussels’ European Quarter before, most recently the first time they voted against the Lisbon Treaty last year.
Back then, the establishment in Brussels blamed one man above all for the defeat. His name is Declan Ganley. He was one of the driving forces behind the No campaign the last time around, and he’s back to do it again. Your correspondent recently sat down with him to find out what he’s fighting for in trying to see to it that Ireland once again votes No to Lisbon—and in the process, he hopes, forces the EU to choose a different path.
I put it to Mr. Ganley, an impeccably dressed, balding Irishman of 42, that from Brussels, this whole referendum looks profoundly unjust. Why should 1.5 million Irish voters get the opportunity to hold back the progress of 500 million citizens of Europe?
“I would look at it a very different way,” he shoots back. “It’s profoundly undemocratic to walk all over democracy. . . the Irish people had a vote on the Lisbon Treaty. They voted no. A higher percentage of the electorate voted no than voted for Barack Obama in the United States of America. No one’s suggesting he should run for re-election next month. But—hey, presto!—15 months later we’re being told to vote again on exactly the same treaty.” He taps the table for emphasis: “Not one comma has changed in the document.”
But the insult to democracy is more egregious, in his view, than simply asking the Irish to vote twice—that was already done to Ireland with the Nice Treaty in 2002. In this case, it is not just the Irish whose democratic prerogatives are being trampled, but the French and the Dutch, among others, as well.
For full text link to-
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203440104574404643114251588.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
+++ 11. September 2009 +++ Foreign Office Documents Confirm the Euro Was the Price to Pay for German Reunification – British Foreign Office documents, to be released on Sept. 11, officially confirm that British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and French President François Mitterrand insisted that Germany give up national sovereignty, through European integration, as a precondition for the unification of the two Germanys in 1990, after the fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989.
According to the Süddeutsche Zeitung (Sept. 5), which received an advance copy of the documents that cover the period from April 1989 to November 1990, “Germany’s acceptance of a common European currency was the price that Mitterrand exacted from Kohl for unification, and obtained.” Thus, Germany missed the historic chance to use the fall of the Berlin Wall to launch great projects for the common development of both Eastern and Western European infrastructure and industries, as the LaRouche movement proposed at that time (cf. Productive Triangle Paris-Berlin-Vienna).
Instead, under the suicidal criteria of the Maastricht Treaty, Germany proceeded to dismantle its productive economy, so as to calm the fears of the London-based interests, as did the other EU countries.
Although such diplomatic documents are usually kept secret for 30 years, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office decided to declassify the some 500 pages after only 20 years. Why? According to the Financial Times of Sept. 10: “The FCO’s decision to publish the papers, after a year of deliberation by Whitehall officials, is being seen as an attempt by Britain to set the record straight and show that its diplomats were positive about reunification early on – in spite of Mrs. Thatcher’s personal misgivings.”
But that’s a cover-up. In fact, as Lyndon LaRouche pointed out, none of these revelations are new, they are just coming out now, to create a pretense of rifts. As our news service has consistently reported since 1989, François Mitterrand and U.S. President George H.W. Bush were hand-in-glove with the British, and their hysterical “Fourth Reich” propaganda, to contain Germany within an expanded NATO and a globalized economy. Helmut Kohl admitted as much, when he described the “reign of terror” that was imposed on his government.
Of course, Mrs. Thatcher was the most furiously hostile to German reunification, even caricaturally so. The SDZ reports that at a seminar in late March 1990, the Iron Lady asked many questions, which all came down to: “Have the Germans really changed? Or are they still the same old Huns?”
As for the French President, a note written by Charles Powell, then foreign affairs adviser to Mrs. Thatcher, during a luncheon at the Elysee Palace on Jan. 20, 1990 is mentioned by the Financial Times: “Mr. Mitterrand talked about how reunification would see the re-emergence of the ‘bad’ Germans who had once dominated Europe. According to the memo, Mr. Mitterrand at one point said that if Chancellor Kohl were to get his way, Germany could win more ground than Hitler ever did and that Europe would have to bear the consequences.”
Whatever the intended effect of the early declassification of those documents might be, German and other political leaders should use the opportunity to make a swift exit from the euro now, and from the recent EU treaties as well, and to create a Europe of sovereign nation states.
http://news.eirna.com/209114/foreign-office-documents-confirm-the-euro-was-the-price-to-pay-for-german-reunification
Former Prime Minister of Malta asks Ireland to vote ‘No’ to Lisbon (Video)
2009 09 13
Link –
David Cameron is under pressure to pledge a referendum on the new European “constitution” even if it has already been introduced – after a poll found that the majority of Britons want the chance to express their views.
The Conservative leader has only pledged a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty if it has not yet been ratified across Europe but, if elected, he is now under pressure to hold a retrospective poll if necessary. Labour refuses to hold a referendum under any circumstances.
More-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/6183535/David-Cameron-under-pressure-over-EU-referendum-poll.html
Hi Sharon,
This will be my last post here. I know there is still two weeks to go, but the net is saturated with the Irish referendum. Irish homes are set to recieve 1.5 million leaflets within the week pushing for a NO vote. If nothing else, Ireland has the worlds attention at present, and I imagine the Irish hotels will be booked out with all the attention, or at least until after 2 October.
Anyway, I came across this bit and thought it a fitting ending for my domination of your site. Regards.
========================================================
F.A.Q.
Abortion: Will Ireland be able to keep its right to decide on abortion?
Benefits: Is there anything benefical for Ireland in this Treaty?
Changes in EU Constitution: What has been changed in the EU Constitution?
Charter: Why does your group oppose the Charter of Fundamental Rights?
Citizens’ Initiative: If 1 milllion citizens sign a petition for EU legislation, will the Commission have to propose it?
Citizenship: Will a Yes vote force us to give up our Irish Citizenship?
Constitution: If the Lisbon Treaty is not a constitution, why will the Irish Constitution be changed with a ‘Yes’ vote?
Contributions to EU: What effect would the Lisbon treaty have on national contributions to the EU?
Corporate Tax: Why are business groups calling for a Yes if this allows EU to decide our corporate tax rate?
Dail: Since new EU legislative proposals will be discussed in the Dail, would this not mean Government decides?
Defence: As a member of the Irish Defence Force, what would a Yes mean for me?
Education: How does the Lisbon Treaty affects education, students and teachers?
Employment rights: How will the treaty affect employment rights in Ireland?
EU Constitution: If it contains the same substance, why is the Lisbon Treaty not a constitution?
EU legislation: If a sufficient number of Parliaments object to an EU legislative proposal how is it amended or withdrawn?
Farmers’ WTO Veto: What will change in terms of farmers’ veto in WTO talks?
Farmers: I keep reading that farmers are against the treaty. Why? How does it affect them?
France & the Netherlands: Why are France and Holland not holding another referendum? Was a reason given?
Funding: Who is funding this campaign?
Future changes: If Ireland votes Yes, does that mean we will lose the right to vote on future changes?
Health & Education: Will this treaty lead to the privatisation of our health service and education system?
Immigration: Does 28th amendment to our constitution provide for ‘open border’ policy? What is UK’s position?
Immigration: How would the treaty affect Irish Immigration laws? Will we have to join Schengen?
Media: Is Government suppressing media discussion of the pros and cons of the treaty?
Military: Why does the EU want a European army?
Neutrality: Will the lisbon treaty affect our policy of neutrality?
Patents: How would the Lisbon Treaty affect patenting?
Political Parties: Why do the major political parties in Ireland want a ‘YES’ vote?
Power: Why does the Irish government want to give more power to the EU
Primacy: Does the Lisbon Treaty hold primacy over the Irish Constitution?
Privacy: If Treaty is passed, will it mean that EU authorities will have the right to read our emails?
Privatisation: Does the Lisbon Treaty allow for the possibility of privatising water services?
Privatisation: Will the Lisbon Treaty pave the way for the privatisation of vital services, such as the postal service?
Promises: What promises have members of Irish Government made to the EU about delivering a YES result?
Referendum: If Government is holding a referendum for us to decide, why bombard us with Yes signs?
Referendum: What happens if the No vote wins? Would there be another referendum?
Referendums elsewhere: Will there be any referendums in other EU countries?
Schengen: If we say Yes to Lisbon Treaty, will it make Ireland a member of Schengen?
Sovereignty: If the Lisbon treaty is ratified will it erode our sovereignty as an independent nation?
Tax Rates: Would the Lisbon Treaty allow the EU a say on our Income Tax rates?
Tax Veto: Will Ireland be able to keep its veto in tax matters?
Transparency: What would change on Transparency with the Lisbon Treaty?
Treaty amendments: Is it true that the treaty can be changed by the Council without public approval?
Treaty implementation: Could the Lisbon Treaty be implemented even if Ireland votes No?
Vehicle Registration Tax: If Single Market is already in place why are Irish motorists still charged VRT?
http://www.euinfo.ie/index.php?page=faq&op=arg&id=2&pg=1
PS: Best wishes and good luck to you, your team, and Ireland.
Phoenix One UK out.
Hi Phoenix One UK !
Thank You for the time and dedication you put in here (and elsewhere!) on this subject : if only more people would do the same. The organisations here that are pushing for a ‘Yes’ vote are incredibly well-funded and are guaranteed massive amounts of favourable coverage from their like-minded colleagues in the establishment media. We have postered our own areas and delivered our leaflets on a door-to-door basis and table-to-table basis in the pubs , clubs etc and will continue doing so until the very last minute of this campaign. Win or loose , we are at least helping thousands of people to look at the issues involved from a different perspective – that has to be good in the long term.
Thanks again for your time , effort and dedication ; check back in with us now and then , if you have the time – and , either way , make sure to visit us in early October.
Thanks!
Sharon.
Hi Sharon,
Came across some information that I believe relevant to Ireland. I trust its content will speak for itself.
Note I will return after the Irish vote regardless of how Ireland votes. Regards.
Quote:
DF hopes to influence Irish ‘No’ vote Monday, 21 September 2009 09:00 KR News Populist Danish political party takes its anti-EU fight to Ireland by supporting a leaflet campaign
The Danish People’s Party (DF) is contributing 150,000 kroner to an anti-EU campaign encouraging Irish citizens to vote ‘No’ in the upcoming Lisbon Treaty referendum.
European Parliament member Morten Messerschmidt, DF, confirmed his party’s financial backing of the leaflet campaign which will hit households across Ireland prior to the 2 October vote.
‘The pro-union parties in Denmark denied us a referendum and the only place where the public is being asked if they want the Lisbon Treaty is in Ireland. In that way the Irish are also voting on our behalf and we think it’s important to influence the campaign,’ Messerschmidt told Ekstra Bladet newspaper. The pamphlet will outline the disadvantages of voting yes to a treaty which DF believes will reduce Danish influence in Europe. The party has already spoken out against EU legislation overriding Danish immigration law.
The announcement of the DF contribution to the ‘No’ campaign comes a day after Messerschmidt accused European Commission President José Manuel Barroso of trying to buy Irish votes.
Barroso visited the Irish city of Limerick this weekend, where a Dell manufacturing plant cut almost 2000 jobs earlier this year.
The purpose of the president’s visit was to announce that the EU had set up a €14.8 million fund to help the former Dell workers find new jobs.
‘It’s absolutely clear that with the timing of this check just two weeks before the referendum, Barroso wants to buy an Irish ‘Yes’,’ Messerschmidt said.
http://www.cphpost.dk/news/politics/90-politics/46956-df-hopes-to-influence-irish-no-vote.html
Hi again , Phoenix One UK !
I look forward to your return in early October , when we can discuss the margin by which the ‘YES’ side lost!
Thanks!
Sharon.
Blair to be named EU President ‘within weeks’ if Irish vote Yes Paul Waugh, Deputy Political Editor
01.10.09TONY BLAIR is on course to become EU President within weeks, senior government sources signalled today. The former prime minister’s candidacy for the new post will be rushed through as quickly as possible if Ireland votes “Yes” in its referendum on the Lisbon Treaty on Friday.
Mr Blair is among the favourites to become the first President of the European Union, a role that will restore him to the world stage and boost his long-term income.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy has thrown his weight behind a Blair bid. When French foreign minister Bernard Kouchner was asked yesterday if Mr Blair was the only real candidate, he said: “For the moment, indeed”. The former premier has refused to rule himself in or out of the running, but said that “it is good to have fans” for a possible candidacy.
Behind the scenes, allies say that while he is not pushing himself forward, discreet soundings have shown him to be the leading contender.
The President will be selected by leaders of the EU’s 27 nations, rather than face direct election by voters.
The post cannot exist until the Lisbon Treaty is formally ratified by all member states and officials across Europe would scramble to move forward this weekend if Ireland votes “Yes”. Sweden, which chairs the bloc this year, wants a president named by the end of this month.
The only real obstacle in Mr Blair’s path is if Poland and the Czech Republic delay their own ratification of the Treaty.
The Tories claim that the two countries could take up to six months to do so, creating the possibility that a Cameron government could also block Mr Blair’s candidacy.
Senior Conservative sources today said that the Tory leader would “definitely oppose” Mr Blair’s bid for the job. The party is determined not to have the former Labour leader hovering over a Cameron administration and possibly exposing problems with its European policy.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23751121-blair-to-be-named-eu-president-within-weeks-if-irish-vote-yes.do
Thursday, 1 October 2009
Tony Blair: Politician, Terrorist or Both?
Terrorism Defined
There exists a fine line between recognising some groups as terrorists or partisans fighting guerrilla warfare against larger regular forces. In considering the question and examining the actions taken by allied groups within occupied countries during the Second World War, the question clearly answers itself. It depends on your belief and flag.
The drafting of the Terrorist Act 2000 defined terrorism to mean the use or threat of ‘action’ not violence. This interpretation is not only very significant but also makes perfect sense, as the use or threat of use of violence is not the only method of inducing extreme anxiety or fear on a target for the purposes of advancing a cause.
G. Wardloaw defined Political Terrorism as “the use, or threat of use, of violence by an individual or a group, whether acting for or in opposition to established authority, when such action is designed to create extreme anxiety and/or fear-inducing effects in a target larger than the immediate victims with the purpose of coercing that group into acceding to the political demands of the perpetrators.” (Political Terrorism, 2nd edition 1989, page 16).
Tony Blair, Politician, Terrorist or Both?
In comparing the definition of “Political Terrorism” with actions of Prime Minister Tony Blair, one is left to ponder the facts as provided to the global population.
The Prime Minister threatened and used violence in the form of military action against Iraq to establish authority.
The Prime Minister used an action designed to create extreme anxiety and fear-inducing effects on the citizens of Iraq with the purpose of coercing Iraq into acceding to political demands.
The Prime Minister committed the United Kingdom to the invasion and occupation of Iraq by coercing its citizens into believing Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction that could be launched within 45 minutes.
The United Nations did not sanction and opposed the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
Senior members of the Prime Ministers own cabinet did not consider the evidence sufficient to justify the invasion and occupation of Iraq to the point of resigning their positions in protest upon initiation of hostilities.
The occupying forces in Iraq failed to find any evidence of weapons of mass destruction – the stated reason for military action – as admitted before the global population.
The Prime Minister justifies actions stating acting on intelligence given him by the intelligence service, the same evidence produced before the United Nations in the failed attempt to gain their support that was clearly not convincing.
Any action of systematic use of intimidation taken by an individual, group or even the state to coerce a government or community into acceding to specific political demands amounts to terrorism.
By definition, the Prime Minister committed an act of “Political Terrorism” to further his own cause.
Combating Terrorism
There is no question terrorism poses a serious threat to any civilized country, and this publication will not dispute that counter-terrorist strategies are necessary to ensure the protection of our democracy. However, in combating terrorism, it is imperative that the civil and human rights of citizens are maintained, and that the United Kingdom does not allow itself to subside into a dictatorial form of government.
To quote P. Wilkinson: “The primary objective of counter-terrorist strategy must be the protection and maintenance of liberal democracy and the rule of law. It cannot be sufficiently stressed that this aim overrides in importance even the objective of eliminating terrorism and political violence as such. Any bloody tyrant can “solve” the problem of political violence if he is prepared to sacrifice all consideration of humanity, and to trample down all constitutional and judicial rights.”(Terrorism and the Liberal State (1977), page 121)
To quote G. Wardlaw: “To believe we can ‘protect’ liberal democracy by suspending our normal rights and methods of government is to ignore the numerous examples in contemporary history of countries where ‘temporary’, ‘emergency’ rule has subsided quickly and irrevocably into permanent dictatorial forms of government.” (Political Terrorism, 2nd ed (1989), page 69)
Phoenix Flier March 2004
Editor: [Phoenix One UK]
Note: A copy may be also found within the Channel 4 archives.
http://phoenixoneuk.blogspot.com/
Tony Blair could be EU President within weeks – regardless of public opinion
It looks increasingly likely that, if the Lisbon Treaty is ratified, Tony Blair could become the EU’s first permanent President within a matter of weeks. The Swedish EU Presidency has said that they want member states to nominate a candidate for the position at the European Council meeting on 29-30 October. (European Voice, 23 July; NOTW, 28 September)
A senior French diplomat told well-known French journalist Jean Quatremer this week that no-one will “dare say no” to Tony Blair becoming EU President. He also suggested that public opposition in Europe to the Iraq war will not cause a problem for the former British Prime Minister, because, “only public opinion is concerned about this, not the 27 Heads of State and Government that will vote him in”. Indeed, under the Lisbon Treaty, the future EU President will be voted on by a qualified majority in the Council, meaning no country will have a veto, and MPs will not get a say. (Coulisses de Bruxelles French Foreign Office, 29 September)
Lisbon letter to every paper in the country
Now is the time, for all good men and women, to come to the aid of their Country!
Within the next few weeks, we have coming, the most important vote of our lives. I will outline my main concerns in relation to this 2nd referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.
Guarantees: Not worth the paper they’re written on. Denmark’s stronger protocol promises after their Maastrict no vote have since been over ruled and nullified by the European Court of Justice!
Article 48: The self amending clause or escalator clause. Allows the EU to escalate it’s power into new areas WITHOUT coming back to the people for a vote on any changes. So what we have in fact is a treaty that is not set in stone like our own constitution. It is a flexible treaty free to be amended by the EU elite as they wish. This leaves our country and the other individual member states extremely vulnerable! Would you sign a contract on a deal with someone who could legally adjust that contract to favour themselves AFTER you’d signed it ?
Article 2 ECFR: Under Lisbon, The European Charter of Fundamental Rights AND the European Charter of Human Rights become legally binding. Both of those charters are intertwined and will merge.
Article 2 ECFR “Nobody shall be condemned to death, everybody has a right to life” Article 2 protocol 6 of the ECHR which will merge with the ECFR, “A state may make provision for the death penalty in times of war or imminent threat of war”. There you have a ‘backdoor’ whereby the main article can be diluted or negated entirely and this is typical of the deception we will find upon study of the treaty and it’s additional charters. Who’s to say we are under threat of war, could we trust Tony B’liar who led his nation into war under false pretences and who is in the running to be SELECTED, not elected, as the president of the EU ?
As was stated by our own Charlie McCreevy: 95% of Europeans would vote no to this treaty if given the chance. We the people of this country are their voice, and we owe it to them to make the right decision on Oct. 2nd.
Hasn’t the EU been good for Ireland ? We gave the EU 200 Billion worth of our fishing stock. The fishing industry has been decimated as a result. Now our farming industry is under attack, where our farmers are being forced because of EU law to sell milk cheaper than cost, while at the same time becoming ever increasingly crippled under EU bureaucracy. With this pattern in mind would you trust the EU with the Irish economy and our Government ?
I’m all for co-operation with our European neighbours, I just don’t want them telling us what to do. I am for co-operation, not domination!
Creeping EU Tip-Toe Totalitarianism: Have you noticed how with each successive EU treaty it has gradually moved from economic integration into political integration ? Watch how civil liberties globally are being incrementally eroded due to this fraudulent ‘War of Terror” and now via Phoney Environmentalism. Visit my web-site for more on this. Is it democracy to keep coming back to the people with the same treaty that we’ve already voted on ? Is it democracy not to allow the individual member states a referendum on something so crucially important to their futures and the futures of their children’s children ? Was it democracy for most individual member states to ratify the treaty against the wishes of the vast majority of their own people even though it was ILLEGAL for them to do so due to We the People of Ireland having already voted this treaty down ?
Where is this progressing towards ? The agenda is World Government, for the many of us that are awake to see, which is clearly outlined in the books written by the elite and their insiders, books they don’t count on the general population reading. World Government would not be a bad thing if Angels were going to run it, but the people striving for this are anything but. We are NOT ready for World Government yet, not by a long shot. Again more on this on my web-site.
What this is simply about is POWER going into yet fewer and fewer hands, and those that forget history are doomed to repeat it, because Power Corrupts and Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely!
This progression MUST be stopped dead in it’s tracks, and we can help scupper this agenda by voting NO on the 2nd of October.
There is no question of Ireland being sidelined or pushed out of the EU or the euro-currency if we stand by our No to Lisbon. As Ireland’s EU Commissioner Charlie mccreevy said last December : “There is no provision in the existing treaties to isolate anybody. There is no provision to throw out anybody, unless unanimously all the existing members of the club agreed to throw you out. And I doubt, now or in the future, any Irish Government is going to unanimously agree to throw them selves out.”
http://www.jimcorr.com/
“Europe’s nations should be guided towards the super-state without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation.” Jean Monnet (Founding Father Of The EU in a letter to a friend 30th April 1952).).
On June 12th 2008, the proud and independent minded Irish screamed a loud and clear NO to the treacherous Lisbon Treaty and to further integration into the EU Superstate being constructed around the hopes, dreams and lives of the peoples of Europe. Typically, arrogantly and not surprisingly, the Euro Fascists, whose credentials are appearing ever more Totalitarian in structure and ruthless in application, simply ignored the voice of the Irish voter, demanding there be a another vote, and this time, the rebellious Irish would have to get it right, or else.
On October 2nd this year, once again, the fate of nearly 500 million people will be decided by a country whose population totals only 4.2 million. The people of the Republic Of Ireland will now for a second time, have been the only `citizens` of the European Union given the opportunity to have their say on what is potentially the most fundamental piece of legislation in the history of the `Old Continent.` All the other member states have simply ignored the wishes of their people and left ratification to be `rubber stamped` by their respective parliaments. However, it is necessary, at least at the moment, for all twenty seven member states to complete ratification before the `Treaty` becomes legally binding.
So, if the Irish vote is `NO` for a second time, then legally, according to its own rules, Brussels will not be able to implement the Treaty. However, if the Irish people this time around swallow the massive `Pro Treaty` propaganda and vote `Yes,` then the fate of, and inevitable demise of the Nation States of Europe will be sealed. There will be no more serious obstacles left to Federalisation. The long dreamed of (by the Federalists that is) United States Of Europe will inevitably become a reality.
Many, if not the majority of people on both sides of the Atlantic have been `duped` for decades into believing that the EEC/EU is about a `free trade` zone. This is not at all the case, as the above quote by Monsieur Monet illustrates very clearly. So what are the ramifications of a `Yes` vote by the Irish.
The European Union was founded on lies and deceit at the very highest levels of government. This trail of deception has continued since, and on Thursday 13th December 2007 stopped momentarily in Lisbon Portugal, where the `dignitaries` of the member states of this `trading bloc` signed the `EU Reform Treaty`.
This `Treaty` replaces the EU Constitution rejected in 2005 by both France and the Netherlands. Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor and the former French President `Giscard D`Estaing are among many European ministers who have confirmed that the `Treaty` is but the Constitution by another name. The only differentials being the dropping from the new document those articles relating to the EU Flag, Anthem and Motto. Yet only two days prior to the `Historic event` in Lisbon, sixteen member states `broke cover` and called for an amendment to the `Treaty `and the reinstatement of these three articles, thereby transforming the `Treaty` into the original Constitution. They also want to impose the `single currency` on all those member states still retaining their `indigenous` currencies and are suggesting that a `Europe Day` become a holiday for celebration.
The leader of the United Kingdom Independence Party `Nigel Farage` said, “The full treachery being imposed is at last fully out in the open. The pathetic attempts claiming this wasn’t the Constitution are now blown out of the water. Back comes the flag, the anthem and the motto. It means that what was 96% of the original constitution is now 100%. Let’s not hear any more of the `Reform Treaty`. This is the rejected EU Constitution brought back in all it’s pomp.”
Whilst still in office, the former Danish Prime Minister and current Secretary General of NATO, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, decided against any referendum on the Treaty, leaving it’s ratification to Danish MPs. Since then, nothing has changed here in the `Old Kingdom,` where it’s business as usual as far as the Lisbon Treaty is concerned.
Last year, Mr Fogh Rasmussen stated that the “Treaty` was ‘Good For Denmark.” Denmark had planned to hold a referendum on the Constitution back in 2005, but following the `NO` votes in France and Holland, said plans were dropped. The Danish Justice Ministry have concluded that the `Treaty` does not threaten Danish Sovereignty. Mr Fogh Rasmussen was quoted as saying, “ When sovereignty is relinquished, a referendum is needed, but when no sovereignty is relinquished, Parliament will ratify the text.”
He also confirmed plans to hold another referendum on the `Single Currency` (EURO) and whether to end the `opt outs` agreed at Maastricht relating to defence, justice and home affairs.
So, no threat to sovereignty ? Well let’s consider the implications: If a Sovereign Nation State no longer controls it’s own Economy, Defence, Justice System and Home Affairs, can it truly be called a `Sovereign Nation State` any longer ? The answer is quite simply NO.
The Political and Financial Elite of Europe have been working towards this moment since the end of World War Two. In every member state, the personalities might differ, but the rhetoric is always the same; “No Loss Of Sovereignty, good for the people, good for the economy and so on.”
So let us take a look at what this `Treaty` is really about. What is the difference between this document and the original Constitution? German Lawyer, Klaus Heeger, a researcher and legal advisor to the Independent Democratic group in the EU Parliament has drawn the following conclusions regarding the two documents:
According to his analysis, the Constitution granted the EU 105 new `competences`. The `Treaty` also grants 105 new areas of competence. Out goes the EU symbols (Flag, Anthem, Motto) in comes Climate Change. The remaining 104 areas remain the same.
Decision making by qualified majority replaces `unanimity` in 62 new areas in the Reform Treaty. One more than in the Constitution. Out goes `Intellectual property rights,` in comes energy and climate change. The other 60 stay the same.
His conclusion; The EU Constitution by another name.
This sixth and final `Treaty` is the `death knell` for the sovereignty of the member states of the EU. Do not be mistaken about this, and no matter what your `elected` leaders are telling you to the contrary, this is it. This is the culmination of years of plotting, deception and conspiring against the people of Europe. So what’s the big deal many will ask ? Read on and find out.
This `Treaty` is the EU’s most secret and quickest drafted document yet. Opposition to and recognition that the EU is a Police State in the making is growing and they (the conspirators) know that speed is vital. Tony Blair agreed to it in June 2007 as his final `Stab in Britain’s Back.` Foreign Ministers agreed it’s terms in September 2007 and on 13th December two months later, the representatives of each member state signed the document, and now, all that remains is ratification, and the deed will be done.
So, if the result of the Irish vote is a `Yes` and all other member states do as indicated, ratify this treasonous piece of infamy, and the majority already have; how will our lives be affected ?
Our National Parliaments will become redundant as all power that still remains will transfer to Brussels. It will mean the formal end of those Historic Nations of Europe who are member states of the EU. National Embassies around the world will come under the auspices of EU bureaucrats. The ancient counties and provinces will be merged and combined into `EU Administrative Regions`. (The amalgamations of Kommunes in Denmark is a pre-emptive example of this, along with the `devolved` parliaments of Scotland and Wales, to be soon joined by the eradication of `England` and the setting up of similar regional assemblies there).
The EU will take ownership of Police, Military, Nuclear Weapons, Currency Reserves and North Sea Oil as outlined in the Treaty document. Serving members of our Police and Armed Forces will be required to take an oath of loyalty to the EU. Refusal will result in dismissal. The EU will have complete control of all military matters, equipment and facilities.
Political parties will be abolished, phased out or realigned. Only Pan European parties will be allowed. Independence parties will effectively be outlawed as under the 1999 ruling of the European Court Of Justice (case 274/99), it is illegal to criticize the EU. (Even before the Irish Vote, News from Brussels indicates that plans are afoot already to eliminate any `Euro-sceptic groups within the EU Parliament). The EU will have the legal right to close National Parliaments and Assemblies.
Many people will be made unemployed as the EU rule of `retraining` at a citizens own expense becomes universal (including the purchase of a Certificate confirming said retraining). Hundreds of thousands of small businesses will be forced to close due to the enforcement of endless numbers of impracticable and unworkable EU regulations.
Around 107,000 EU laws will criminalise many, as adherence to this amount of legislation is impossible. We will be subject to frequent fines and even arrest as a result of what will be our inevitable ignorance. Take the following as examples: From January 2006, it became illegal to repair your own domestic plumbing, electrics or even your own car. If you buy a boat over six feet long, built after 1999, you will be required to pay the equivalent in Euros of £4000, or face six months in prison. As the EU `Police State` flexes it’s muscles ever more, each of us will live under the fear and threat of arrest or prosecution for any one of a myriad of offences, even minor ones.
The Large Corporations will do well of course, utilising massive immigration from within and without the EU, paying minimum wages to immigrants at the expense of the indigenous population, thus forcing salaries downwards. Furthermore, these Corporations will have a near Monopoly on employment (along with Government), and will be able to dictate conditions and terms of employment without fear of contradiction.
Top Government Jobs and the inevitable corruption which will accompany this monopoly, will create a new `Class Divide` ensuring the rich and their `fellow travellers` get richer, whilst the majority decline into poverty. Taxes will increase in order to pay for the massive growth in bureaucracy.
There will be no `redress of grievance` through local `democratic` channels because there won’t be any local democracy. Or any democracy at all for that matter. The `EU Administrative Regional Governments` will be unelected (See the EU Regionalisation plan on the EU Website). Our only vote will be to the powerless EU Parliament. We will be ruled by the unelected EU Commissioners, who have no `accountability to the people` at any level.
If we demonstrate or protest, we can be seized and relocated to another EU Region. The EU Arrest Warrant and the various legislation introduced across the EU since 9/11 will give the Authorities absolute power over us. The shootings of innocents `Philip Prout` and `Jean de Menezes` were entirely legal under EU Law. The intimidation and growing `Anti Muslim` vitriol across the EU is becoming reminiscent of the treatment of Jews in pre-war Germany. A Federal European State will become a very unpleasant place to be.
Following Federation, in and around 15 years hence, Europe could collapse under the weight of it’s own Bureaucracy and Corruption. There will be so little production, that no amount of taxation will be able to support the vast, inept, corrupt and wasteful government machinery. Many will be reduced to poverty on the brink of starvation. The complete lack of any `checks and balances` will leave the door open for any would be dictatorship.
The EU as monstrous as it is, is nothing more than a `stepping stone` to `World Government`. Before you dismiss this article as `Scare Mongering` or `Conspiracy Theory`, find out how many of your own country’s leading politicians are members of such `Secret Organisations` as the Bilderbergers, Trilateral Commission, Club Of Rome, and the Royal Institute For International Affairs.
Each and every one of the above are totally dedicated to a `One World` Government and see a Federal Europe as a necessary evolution towards that goal. Their memberships read like a who’s who of the planet’s `power players`. Danish readers for example, might be very surprised to discover which of their country’s Political and Financial Elites attend the Bilderberger meetings, which has been in the forefront of machinations to further European Federalisation. To find out which of your elected representatives are members of any of the above groups, just type in the organisation’s name on any recognised search engine. Then sit back and prepare to be shocked.
We live in an age where people seem to have abdicated all responsibility for their own lives to Government. This has been going on since the end of World War Two, but has accelerated markedly since the 1980’s. This `social irresponsibility` led us to Lisbon on 13th December 2007, where our so called leaders signed away our ancient rights and freedoms in the name of their `great plan`. If we sit back and do nothing, the rest of our lives will become a nightmare of our own making, because in the final analysis, it is we who will have handed over our rights and liberties into the hands of `wolves.`
The future well being of a whole continent lies in the hands of the Brave and Heroic Irish people. They need our support. They need to know they are not alone. It’s time to start writing to your `elected` representatives, time to find the time to research what the EU `Beast` is really about. It’s time to switch off the TV and pick up a book about the EU, or check out the many Internet sites relating to this Totalitarian `Super-State in the making.`
Do something, speak to your friends, neighbours, family; just do something before it is too late, and if the Irish vote yes, it is.
Comments to: http://righteousalliance.blogspot.com/
Reference:
http://www.jimcorr.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&layout=blog&id=10&Itemid=77
http://www.bonde.com/index.php/bonde_uk/article/C221/
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0909/breaking45.htm
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0909/breaking45.htm
http://www.freenations.freeuk.com/
http://www.statewatch.org/
——————————————————–
EU summit on Irish Lisbon ‘Assurances’: The Emperor’s New Clothes,
The EU Summit Strategy for dealing with the Irish No vote to Lisbon is similar to the Edinburgh Agreement of December 1992, when Denmark changed it’s No to Maastrict for full Danish opt-outs from some provisions of that Treaty.
First, the European Council will make a ‘decision’ for the Prime Ministers and Presidents of the EU member states.This so-called ‘decision’ did not previously exist as a formal legal instrument of EU summits. It was specially invented to get around the Danish No to Maastrict in 1992 by the Head of the Council Legal Service, Jean-Claude Piris. It is a creative way of giving people the feeling of legal certainty which does not and cannot exist since only properly ratified EU treaties, with their Protocols, can offer binding legal guarantees in EU law.
This ‘decision’ of the EU summit changes absolutely nothing in the treaties. If it did change anything, even the smallest changes could only be validated through new ratification’s by all 27 member states in their national parliaments, or by referendums.
Just as in the 1992 Edinburgh Agreement the Prime Ministers and Presidents state their desire ‘to address those concerns in conformity with that treaty’ (i.e. the Lisbon Treaty).
This is the core sentence of the Summit document. In the so-called ‘Irish assurances’ not one single comma in the Lisbon Treaty will be changed.
Up until now no government has been able to give a single example of a national law which cannot be affected in some way of other by the Lisbon Treaty.
This does not mean that the current generation of politicians has in mind the establishment of European laws in all areas. But in reality they could to this if they wished with a few derogation’s. Decisions of the European Court could also affect every single area of what is currently believed to be a purely national responsibility.
This ‘decision’ of the EU Summit isn’t signed by the Heads of State or Government. In legal form it is simply an Annex to a Summit Declaration.
The ‘decision’ is followed by a common ‘Solemn Declaration’ which may express the intentions of the politicians taking part. It does not prevent politicians at future Summits affecting these ‘assurances’.
Finally, Ireland has its own Irish declaration. A unilateral declaration of this kind has to be interpreted as a statement of position by one state which the others do not necessarily agree with. If they did agree to it, it would have been part of the Joint Declaration or the earlier ‘decision’ in the name of all 27 states.
In 1992 the Edinburgh Agreement was sent to the United Nations to register it as an international agreement, giving it a certain legal value under international law, although not necessarily under EU law. It remains to be seen how the planned Brussels agreement from this June’s EU Summit will be archived.
________
Comments on the Draft text of 15 June 2009 (text from the Irish Times, plus introduction not quoted in the Irish Times but existing in the draft ‘Annex l’).
Annex 1
DECISION OF THE HEADS OF STATE OR GOVERNMENT OF THE 27 MEMBER STATES OF THE EU, MEETING WITHIN THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL, ON THE CONCERNS OF THE IRISH PEOPLE ON THE TREATY OF LISBON.
The Heads of State or Government of the 27 Member States of the European Union, whose Governments are signatories of the Treaty of Lisbon,
Taking note of the outcome of the Irish referendum of 12 June 2008 on the Treaty of Lisbon and of the concerns of the Irish people identified by the Taoiseach,
Desiring to address these concerns in conformity with that Treaty,
Having regard to the Conclusions of the European Council of 11-12 December 2008,
Have agreed on the following Decision:
Section A
Right to Life, Family and Education
Nothing in the Treaty of Lisbon attributing legal status to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, or in the provisions of that Treaty in the area of Freedom, Security and Justice
affects in any way the scope and applicability of the protection of the right to life in Article 40.3.1. 40.3.2 and 40.3.3, the protection of the family in Article 41 and the protection of the rights in respect of education in Articles 42 and 44.2.4 and 44.2.5 provided by the Constitution of Ireland.
COMMENT: True, A Treaty does not change the Irish Constitution. However, the above is a misleading statement since the European Court has already taken decisions affecting Irish abortion law. In the so-called SPUC v. Grogan case of 1991, the European Court of Justice decided that abortion is a normal ‘service’ under the treaties which can normally be provided everywhere. Then the Court ‘on balance’ established an argument on proportionality where they accepted the Irish constitutional limits for the time being.
The Court Adovate General wanted to entirely overrule Art. 40.3.1 of the Irish Constitution, but the Court did not go along with that proposal then. The European Parliament has called for legal access to abortion in all member states in a resolution of 2002. The Council of Europe sought similar access to abortion in 2008.
It is unrealistic to expect the Court to take such a decision as long as abortion is forbidden in a big country like Poland. But the example quoted shows the misleading character of the new ‘assurances’. The power to decide will always reside with the Court, even on the most sensitive ethical questions like euthanasia and abortion, which many people believe should be decided at the national level.
Moreover the Lisbon Treaty would make all citizens of the 27 member states into real citizens of the European Union for the first time by conferring on them an ‘additional’ citizenship. Their rights and duties as EU citizens would ultimately be decided by the Court of Justice. It would therefore fall to the Court of Justice to apply the rights set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights for the 500 million or so citizens of the EU.
Section B
Taxation
Nothing in the Treaty of Lisbon makes any change of any kind for any Member State, to the extent or operation of the competence of the European Union in relation to taxation.
COMMENT: True, EU competence on taxation is not changed. The EU already has certain competencies as regards taxes. The limiting principle is that all harmonisation must be unanimous. The Lisbon Treaty would allow the governments unanimously to change from unanimity to decision by qualified majority (Art. 48 TEU). The treaty also inserts a new sentence on the internal market which would permit the EU to outlaw national tax measures if they can be regarded as disturbing the internal market. (Protocol No.27).
The Lisbon Treaty adds in the avoidance of ‘distortion of competition’ as an aim of the tax paragraph in Art.113 TFEU, thus opening the way for more court cases outlawing distorting tax rules, such as low corporation taxes, different taxation rules for foreign-owned assets, etc.
The Lisbon Treaty also defines the Internal Market as an area without distortions of competition under Protocol No.27 (on the Internal Market and Competition). This should strengthen the hand of the Court in applying the internal market rules, which are decided by qualified majority vote, to get rid of such distortions.
The Commission has proposed a harmonisation of the tax base for corporate taxation based on the article dealing with indirect taxes. This was in the Commission’s annual work programme for 2008, but has been postponed until after the second Irish Referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.
The Lisbon Treaty also provides for totally new taxes to be imposed by the EU to add to its ‘own resources’ by unanimity (Art.311 TFEU). Where are the new assurances here?
Section C
Security and Defence
The Union’s action on the international scene is guided by the principles of democracy, the rule of law, the universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for human dignity, the principles of equality and solidarity, and respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law.
The Union’s common security and defence policy is an integral part of the common foreign and security policy and provides the Union with an operational capacity to undertake missions outside the Union for peace-keeping, conflict prevention and strengthening international security in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter. It does not prejudice the specific character of the security and defence policy of Ireland.
The Lisbon Treaty does not affect or prejudice Ireland’s traditional policy of military neutrality.
It will be for Ireland, acting in a spirit of solidarity and without prejudice to its traditional policy of military neutrality, to determine the nature of aid or assistance to be provided to a Member
State which is the object of a terrorist attack or the victim of armed aggression on its territory. Any decision to move to a common defence will require a unanimous decision of the European Council. It would be a matter for the Member States, including Ireland, to decide, in accordance with the provisions of the Treaty of Lisbon and with their respective constitutional requirements, whether or not to adopt a common defence.
COMMENT: A common defence may be established by unanimity for all, or for those participating in ‘structured co-operation’ by a sub-group of member states. Ireland decides its own position. The content is true, but again misleading since Ireland has already opted in favour of participating in the common European Defence Agency and all other military structures and activities of the EU. Denmark has a derogation from these in a Treaty Protocol and does not partake in EU defence matters even though it is a NATO country. The Treaty also provides for a ‘mutual’ defence obligation among all member states.
Nothing in this Section affects or prejudices the position or policy of any other Member State on security and defence.
It is also a matter for each Member State to decide, in accordance with the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty and any domestic legal requirements, whether to participate in permanent structured co-operation or the European Defence Agency.
The Treaty of Lisbon does not provide for the creation of a European army or for conscription to any military formation.
COMMENT: The first European battle groups have already been established,. They have decided upon a joint military force of 60,000 troops. No new treaty is required to increase this number to 600,000 or 6 million EU soldiers. Where is the new assurance?
It does not affect the right of Ireland or any other Member State to determine the nature and volume of its defence and security expenditure and the nature of its defence capabilities.
It will be a matter for Ireland or any other Member State to decide, in accordance with any domestic legal requirement, whether or not to participate in any military operation.
Section D
Final Provisions
Annex 2
Solemn Declaration on Workers’ Rights and Social Policy
The European Council confirms the high importance which the Union attaches to:
Social progress and the protection of workers’ rights;
COMMENT: Yet the 2007 Laval case has already permitted foreign workers to be employed for much lower salaries than the normal rates in Ireland. The Trade Unions in the European TUC proposed that a social protocol be added to the Lisbon Treaty to set this judgement aside. This protocol was fairly weak in its provisions, but even this was not accepted.
* Public services, as an indispensable instrument of social and regional cohesion;
* The responsibility of Member States for the delivery of education and health services;
COMMENT: Yes, they may still be responsible. But the Court has already made rulings on requiring free competition for important areas of education and health. A patients’ directive currently being prepared will bring more detailed EU rules. Where are the new assurances?
* The essential role and wide discretion of national, regional and local authorities in providing, commissioning and organising services of general economic interest.
In doing so, it underlines the importance of respecting the overall framework and provisions of the EU Treaties.
It recalls that the Treaties as modified by the Treaty of Lisbon:
* Aim at establishing an internal market and working for the sustainable development of Europe based on balanced economic growth and price stability, a highly competitive social market economy, aiming at full employment and social progress, and a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment;
* Will give expression to the Union’s values and, through Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union, recognise the rights, freedoms and principles set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
* Aim to combat social exclusion and discrimination, and to promote social justice and protection, equality between women and men, solidarity between generations and protection of the rights of the child;
* Oblige the Union, when defining and implementing its policies and activities, to take into account requirements linked to the promotion of a high level of employment, the guarantee of adequate social protection, the fight against social exclusion, and a high level of education, training and protection of human health;
* Include, as a shared value of the Union, the essential role and the wide discretion of national, regional and local authorities in providing, commissioning and organising services of general economic interest as closely as possible to the needs of the users;
* Do not affect in any way the competence of Member States to provide, commission and organise non-economic service of general interest;
COMMENT: This is the case as long as all treaty principles relating to free competition, non-discrimination, etc. are respected. In reality there is not a single non-economic service which cannot be affected by judgements of the Court.
* Provide that the Council, when acting in the area of common commercial policy, must act unanimously when negotiating and concluding international agreements in the field of trade in social, education and health services, where those agreements risk seriously disturbing the national organisation of such services and prejudicing the responsibility of Member States to deliver them;
COMMENT: But who decides what is ‘seriously disturbing the national organisation of such services’? It is the EU Commission, not Ireland. Again no new assurance. The phrases above hide the fact that new trade agreements will be adopted by majority votes as a general rule. Even the weak derogation’s mentioned can easily be changed from unanimity to qualified majority by the governments.
* Provide that the Union recognises and promotes the role of the social partners at the level of the European Union, and facilitates dialogue between them, taking account of the diversity of national systems and respecting the autonomy of social partners.
________
IRISH DECLARATION ( text only partly available)
It reiterates that the participation of contingents of the Irish Defence Forces in overseas operations, including those carried out under the European common security and defence policy requires (a) the authorisation of the operation by the Security Council of the General Assembly of the United Nations, (b) the agreement of the Irish Government, and (c) the approval of Dáil Éireann, in accordance with Irish law.
COMMENT: The Lisbon Treaty allows the EU to participate in wars without the authorisation of the UN. Ireland decides for itself whether it will participate in such wars with Irish soldiers. This is true but again it gives no new assurance.
Ireland notes that nothing obliges it to participate in permanent structured co-operation as provided for in the Treaty on European Union. Any decision enabling Ireland to participate will require the approval of Dáil Éireann in accordance with Irish law.
Ireland notes also that nothing obliges it to participate in the European Defence Agency, or in specific projects or programmes initiated under its auspices. Any decision to participate in such projects or programmes will be subject to national decision-making and the approval of Dáil Éireann in accordance with Irish law. Ireland declares that it will participate only in those projects and programmes that contribute to enhancing the capabilities required for participation in UN-mandated missions for peace-keeping, conflict prevention and strengthening international security, in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter.
COMMENT: But Ireland is already a member of the European Defence Agency. Here there may be something new. How will Ireland both at the same time participate in, and remain apart from, some of its activities?
The situation set out in this Declaration would be unaffected by the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon. In the event of Ireland’s ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon, this Declaration will be
associated with Ireland’s instrument of ratification.
COMMENT: This is of no legal significance. It simply means new wrapping paper around the same Lisbon Treaty and the same legal obligations. Nothing in the Lisbon Treaty will changed.
________
GENERAL COMMENTS
– The vast majority of European laws will still be decided by civil servants behind closed doors under the Commission and Council instead of being adopted by elected representatives of the peoples.
– The non-elected Commission will still retain its monopoly of proposing all European laws instead of these being decided by elected representatives in national parliaments or directly by the voters.
– EU meetings and documents will generally remain private instead of being governed by new rules requiring all meetings and documents to be open and transparent, unless special exception are approved by elected representatives.
– Ireland and the other member states will lose their right to propose and decide their own Commissioner under Lisbon. Instead the Irish Commission and other national commissioners will be decided by the new Commission President, in whose appointment the big states will have a decisive say.
– Ireland will halve its voting strength in the Council of Ministers under Lisbon while Germany will double its voting strength, and France, Britain and Italy will increase theirs by 50% each.
– When Ireland joined the European Community in 1973, Germany, France, Italy and the UK had 3.3 times more votes than Ireland. Now Germany will have 20 times more votes than Ireland and Britain and France and Italy 15 times.
– The Irish ‘assurances’ do not explain how having half as much influence in the EU than Ireland has today would help fight unemployment and resolve its economic crisis in the interests of Irish companies, farmers, fishermen and workers.
___________
For further sources and information on the above comments, see the euabc.eu under the headings workers’ rights, taxation,
abortion, Lisbon Treaty etc.
Hi Sharon,
I can imagine how you and your team are with result, but given the mountain you all had to climb, and against a stacked deck at that, I think you all did a fantastic job.
If the Czeck pesident can hang on, us Brits may get our say. Our turn, and you know how I will be voting.
Please give my regards to everyone.
Best wishes for the future.
Phoenix One UK
Hi again , Phoenix One UK !
Thanks for calling back – just so sorry it couldn’t be in better circumstances!
We are a wee bit disappointed and browned-off already with the gloating of the ‘Yes’ camp but, other than that – we’ll survive to take them on again! They may have won this battle , but the war goes on…
Thanks again!
Sharon.