The UK and Ireland, nervously united on the Lisbon Treaty 2

I wrote a wrap for my thread on the future of the Lisbon Treaty in the UK and Ireland but for some reason the system won’t let me comment! ( Shurely shome mistake). Having typed out the piece, I don’t want to deny you the benefit of it ( small joke). As ever, many comments om the subject are deeply sceptical. I agree that a long line of fudges leaves plenty of room for confusion as to how the EU really operates. There is a real accountability deficit that national parliaments if they could be bothered, should supply. It’s a real omission, that in the political crisis caused by the recession in both our States, that there was been no call for greater scrutiny for EU matters. That suggests a real decline in the priority given to EU matters. There are no real precedents for the EU, an institution which is more than an alliance but less than a State. It seems obvious that an institution of 27 members is bound to be hard to run with both consent and efficiency. But there must be something right about it, when so many want to join.The recession is providing a real test, with the accent on national decision-taking now, apart from the currency factor for Euroland, but with EU consequences for all members to come. The EU’s very size probably vitiates the idea of a federation for at least a generation. Dave, it will be interesting to see how the Irish referendum is worded. Plainly the protocols count. As ever, it will be up to the national parliaments and the supreme courts to monitor how the EU institutions impinge on national life. Reader and others seem to have forgotten that we all have a vote. The British can vote Conservative. A UK referendum seems to depend on an Irish No. It seems unlikely that the Tories will proceed with one otherwise. However regardless of a UK referendum, you can be assured of a UK Euro-sceptic response which will argue for lots of subsidiarity and a new Bill of Rights which may patriate many judgments of the overloaded ECJ and the non-EU ECHR,( and deliver judgments quicker) and arrive at European norms our own way. Labour in practice is little different. A referendum on the euro is deep into the future, if ever, whatever Mandelson may toss out. The Irish, may I remind everyone, can vote No. If they do the EU will survive and Ireland will become like Norway – with the difference, that it may deal a blow to international confidence in Ireland, with unknown implications for its fragile economy.

Name:

  • Brian,

    You need to register and/or join in because Mick has turned that on (I think due to trolling.)

    You don’t think the Zollverein is a precedent? Isn’t that what the Euroscpetics are scared of?

    I’d like to see Libson be rejected again as much for the pleasure of watching Cameron squirm after the next election as for anything else.

  • Dave

    “It’s a real omission, that in the political crisis caused by the recession in both our States, that there was been no call for greater scrutiny for EU matters. That suggests a real decline in the priority given to EU matters.”

    “Scrutiny for EU matters” is deliberately censored from the nation debate because the EU is not accountable to the national parliament or to the nation. How many UK people know the role that the EU is playing in the privatisation of their Post Office or the role that EU laws played in bankrupting that Post Office? How many of them know the role the EU played in Railtrack or in the botched change of the emergency number system? How many of them know that 70% of all UK government is actually UK government or that more than half of all regulation effecting UK businesses are actually EU laws? Very few of them know how little democracy they actually have in the UK, and the government does not point that out because they would be pointing out that they have given away the nation’s sovereignty and rendered their own democracy into a sham that does not have the power to decide important policies and must implement policies that are not decided by the nation. People see the EU as irrelevant to them because they have been led to believe that it is irrelevant to them. In addition, the number of people voting in EU elections has been in steady decline.

    “There are no real precedents for the EU, an institution which is more than an alliance but less than a State.”

    It tries to pass itself off as an alliance of states but its actual agenda is to become a state that will replace the existing states. As one of the founding fathers of the EU, Jean Monnet, said: “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.”

    “It seems obvious that an institution of 27 members is bound to be hard to run with both consent and efficiency. But there must be something right about it, when so many want to join.”

    They want access to a large market for their goods and services that is made up, not of the EU, but of its member states. The EU has gotten itself into a position whereby it is able to impose its “ever closer union” agenda on member states by threatening them with exclusion from the market for no-compliance – or, more accurately, with the protectionist tariffs that would apply if they were outside of that market. It is a customs union.

    There is no need for a country to surrender its national sovereignty to the EU in order to trade with other states on the continent of Europe. There is absolutely no logic to it either. That is simply a form of blackmail that the EU uses to further its own agenda of becoming a state. These states would be much better off if they disbanded the EU and implemented free trade agreements with each other. It is not necessary to “pool” sovereignty in order to trade freely: all that is needed is for those states who wish to trade freely with each other not to impose tariffs on each other’s goods and services.

    That is all that the nations of these countries desire but none of them have the power to act alone to secure the essential disbandment of the EU and too many of those states are controlled by Euro-zealots who believe in the Treaty of Rome and its vision of a single nation of European which will have one shared claim to national self-determination to replace the claims of the existing nations on the continent of Europe, so the EU is an entity that none of its states can control.

    The EU is merely a pimp that has attached itself to that harem of trading nations and stands at the entrance to the tent. There is no “efficiency” in the EU. Its regulation fetish, for example, costs businesses in excess of one trillion pounds per year. Membership of the EU costs the UK in excess of 56 billion pounds per year. No one has gained from it, and even Ireland (often touted as an example of what 30 billion worth of EU grants can do) has not bothered to mention the little matter of the EU extracting somewhere between 100 and 150 billion worth of fishing stock from Irish territorial waters or the decimation that it has caused to the Irish fishing industry or that the CAP has caused to the Irish farming industry (try spotting a field with anything other than grass growing in it). Nor is there mention of the billons in taxes that are raised in Ireland and sent to the EU, or the role that surrendering sovereignty over the Irish monetary system played in the collapse of that monetary system (the external debt exploded from 11 punts prior to joining the Eurozone to 1.67 trillion euros less than 10 years after joining it).

  • Dave

    [b]Continued[/b]

    But what I find most objectionable is that people are being led to renounce their right to national self-determination under false pretences. They really don’t understand what they are doing. They don’t understand the relationship between sovereignty and democracy, and they seem to think that democracy is something they can delegate to third parties if nice rewards are promised to them (but, of course, never delivered).

    “The EU’s very size probably vitiates the idea of a federation for at least a generation.”

    I thought you said that the agenda was not to become a state but to remain an alliance?

    “Dave, it will be interesting to see how the Irish referendum is worded.”

    Interesting but of no consequence. They do not alter the treaty. And besides, the rejected treaty was not a list of pick and choose options. It was rejected in its entirity.

    “Plainly the protocols count. As ever, it will be up to the national parliaments and the supreme courts to monitor how the EU institutions impinge on national life.”

    Wrong, the ECJ takes precedence under the treaty, rendering the “national parliaments and the supreme courts” impotent.

    “Reader and others seem to have forgotten that we all have a vote.”

    But readers haven’t forgotten that your vote is declared null and void if you oppose EU federalism/integrationism and that your so-called “national parliament” (puppet administration of the EU) will collude with the EU mandarins to overturn the result of the vote until you vote in a manner that is acceptable to the EU

    “The British can vote Conservative.”

    National sovereignty should not reside with political parties. It properly belongs to the people. It is the people who must decide if they wish to dissolve their right to national self-determination and replace their nation with the new nation of European.

    “A UK referendum seems to depend on an Irish No.”

    Some folks just don’t grasp the concept of national democracy thanks to the EU systematic perversion of it in order to further its own agenda.

    “The Irish, may I remind everyone, can vote No.”

    The Irish, I hope, will vote no. But I think that the level of scaremongering and brainwashing that the government will subject them to will distort the vote to the point of being meaningless. It should be that if a government lose a referendum on the EU that they must resign so that they do not collude with foreign powers to overturn democracy. 160 out of 166 members of the Irish parliment are europhiles in addition to the media being saturated with them. The EU-zealots have a huge advantage and this time around there is no organised opposition in the form of Declan Ganley. One thing is certain, if they do vote no they will be forced to vote again but if they vote yes, they won’t.

    “If they do the EU will survive and Ireland will become like Norway – with the difference, that it may deal a blow to international confidence in Ireland, with unknown implications for its fragile economy.”

    Sorry, but the existing treaties don’t have any exist clauses. You can’t kick us out. 😉 But while that isn’t scaremongering to me (since I would rejoice if Ireland exited the EU and utilised the talents of its nation and built a strong independent economy that didn’t look to a backward and underperforming region of the word such as the EU), most folks will be influenced by the scaremongering that you are engaging in.

  • Nomad

    Dave,

    You appear to be trapped in an outdated notion of statehood, the nation and sovereignty vis a vis the European Union. A European nation is being realized, albeit more readily by our central and eastern European brethren.

    The only way to change the EU is by acting within it. Ireland may have a small voice in the EU, but then it is a tiny country/population- it’s influence in the EU is greater than its influence in the world at large if left to compete with the Chinese, the Indians, the Americans as an independent state. Ireland and Britain are perhaps going through a similar process to New York and New England when the USA underwent it’s long transformation to a single power.

    I would be only too happy to be permitted to vote for a European president, and for the EU institutions to be tightened up- they are as you happily observe, far from perfect. The people do have or could have more influence than you pretend, if only the local governments in western Europe would educate it’s people a little more. We just had the worlds largest election in the past couple of weeks for the Parliament, and our local governments (elected by us) make many more appointments. If anything, Ireland has too much representation given it’s size.

    Ireland and the United Kingdom will still retain sovereignty over many many issues, just like Texas and California do, but the only path to greatness for Europeans lies as a single block.

  • Brian Walker

    Dave’s sermon is as good as ever, bounced off my text. It make you wonder why anyone would want to join a conspiracy for undermining politicians’ raison d’etre, their desire to rule! But thee are good points there, if overdone, that I’ve tired to acknowledge.

  • In any case, Free Europe Constitution on http://www.FreeEurope.info is readable, only ten points – and everyone can vote online. Just the opposite to the Lisbomb Treaty…

  • Dave

    Nomad, there is nothing “outdated” about statehood. 197 of the world’s 203 states are nation-states. Indeed, the EU doesn’t regard the concept of statehood as outdated, since it is busy engineering that privilege for itself. It merely propagandises that the concept of statehood is outdated in order to persuade those states whose statehood it covets to renounce their loyalty to their respective states in order to allow the EU to become a state.

    Should it become a state (and this ambition, if realised, will be short-lived), it will be a small state that comprises circa 4% of the world’s population with the remaining 96% of the world’s population residing in nation-states that are not the nation-state of Europa (which, according to the Treaty of Rome, owns the right to national self-determination of the ‘nation’ of European).

    This, of course, allows the EU-zealots, in their own minds, to claim that they are democrats and to claim that national parliaments, not the E parliament, are the ones that are anti-democratic since those national parliaments have improperly usurped the right to national self-determination that properly belongs to the nationality of European.

    So, if you were to say to an EU-zealot, for example, how could the Irish nation having 0.8% control of the voting rights in the EU parliament – and thereby 0.8% control of laws that it must live by – when it should have 100% control in its own parliament be considered to be democratic, they will chirpily retort that is isn’t democratic because, of course, they should have 0% control and the nation of European should have 100%.

    Brian, I agree that I have an appalling habit of lecturing, but politicians love the EU precisely because it gives them power via a secret cartel to rule not just their nation but a merger of nations that extends their power of ruling to half a billion people. Don’t you think that Brian Cowen, a wee bogman who would be going around the circuit courts in the Midlands getting his clients off with parking fines with his arse hanging out of his pants if not elected, delights in the power that he has over half a billion people as a member of the European Council? They all do. When they mount their wifes, it’s that that gets them off. 😉

  • Denis Cooper

    “Plainly the protocols count.”

    There are no protocols; they don’t exist; there isn’t even the draft of a protocol, awaiting final agreement before it is ratified by all member states; there’s nothing more than the promise of a protocol at some indeterminate point in the future.

    That’s perfectly clear from the official conclusions from the EU summit, here:

    http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/108622.pdf

    And even that promise of a protocol won’t be operative at the time of the referendum, but would only become operative when the treaty came into force – something I can’t understand.

    So who are these people who are making that promise? The EU leaders.

    One of whom is Gordon Brown, for goodness sake; then there’s Berlusconi; and Merkel, who devised the scheme to revive the legal substance of the rejected EU Constitution as an “amending treaty”, which would not be put to any referendums … who could be so foolish as to rely on any promise, or accept any completely unforceable “guarantee”, from any of these shysters? Let alone buy a used car from any of them …

  • George

    However regardless of a UK referendum, you can be assured of a UK Euro-sceptic response which will argue for lots of subsidiarity and a new Bill of Rights which may patriate many judgments of the overloaded ECJ and the non-EU ECHR,( and deliver judgments quicker) and arrive at European norms our own way.

    I really don’t understand the logic of this sentence.

    The ECJ has primacy when it comes to interpreting EC law. National courts do not have the freedom to “arrive at European norms our own way”.

    National courts are obliged to make a preliminary reference to the ECJ if there is any need for interpretation of provisions of the Treaty.

    How will a eurosceptic response affect how the British judiciary is required to act? What happened to the much-vaunted separation of powers?

    Subsidiarity is one thing but the workings of the ECJ and EC law is something totally different.

  • soandso

    Surely when Ireland says no they’ll just hold another referendum? We all know that the people aren’t clever enough to vote correctly the first two times so third time could be the charm.

    Also does no one else find it hilarious that Sinn Fein and the Conservatives are on the same side?

  • Dave

    Denis Cooper, you’re right that there is no protocol and you’re also right not to trust the word of liars. However, you have to understand that what people were actually concerned about was not addressed by the government because it is the taboo subject of the surrender of the nation-state of Ireland and the delivery of ownership of the state to the EU. In order to pretend that a yes/no referendum was actually a list of pick-and-choose options, the government commissioned a sample poll of voters and decided that there were a few things that the voters had “unreasonable fears” about that resulted in them rejecting the treaty and that these “unreasonable fears” could be resolved by declarations that their “unreasonable fears” were indeed unreasonable and that this successful resolution allowed the result of a fair democratic vote to be overturned and another poll to be called. So, even if these reassurances about the alleged “unreasonable fears” have no binding status (and they don’t), that matters not because it is simply a fabrication by the Irish government and their puppetmasters in the EU. It is the exact same treaty that they will be voting on again, and not one comma of it will be altered nor will the meaning of the treaty be in any altered by the promised protocol.

    This is, of course, an appalling fraud but it is how this corrupt anti-democratic regime operates and how it forces governments to commit treason against their own people, corrupting and undermining democracy in every state that it infects. The EU is not a democratic entity even by its own deluded rationale of its engineered nationality of European (as if a continent – or a part of it – could be a nation, much like Earthling becoming a nation). It was born out of WW2 where its founding fathers saw that people elected Hitler, and thereafter they decided that people must never again be trusted with democracy. That anti-democratic sentiment is at the core of this despicable regime. At the very top of it is group of unelected Euro-zealots who author these treaties and impose them upon states, and then there are the commissions who are also unelected. It is a top-down exercise where elites control the power and never a bottom-up exercise where people have power.

    As Jean Monnet (quoted by me above) said the trick is to lead the people where you want them to be without them knowing where they are going and until it is too late for them to resist. That places deception at the core of the dismal enterprise. But what does he think will happen when they discover where they are and that they were led there under false pretences? Then all hell breaks loose as nations must once again reclaim their rights to national self-determination. The problem will be all those “Europeans” who have been self-colonised and who object to the reclamation of national rights. These muppets who have been successfully inoculated with the artificially-engineered nationality of European and who are already loyal to their (as yet non-existent) state simply have no idea of the totalitarian regime that they are embracing. They really do buy all the united colours of Benetton bullshit. Still, as an Israeli passport holder, I can always make a quick exit and leave the muppets to their fate. 😉

  • Dave

    By the way, on the matter of the exit clause in the Lisbon Treaty, one of the problems ahead for a state that wishes to hold a poll of withdrawal will be whether its indigenous nation is voting or whether the a member of the European nation is voting. The member of the indigenous nation and the member of the European nation will both be voting on separate national interests, yet the member of the European nation will masquerade as a member of the indigenous nation. Clearly, the member of the European nation will use his or her vote to veto the will of the members of the indigenous nation. How do you separate the two nations for polling purposes if they were both originally the same nation and it, wrongly, the member of the European nation conflates his national interest with the national interest of the indigenous nation? You can’t separate them so you will be in a position whereby the EU has engineered a permanent veto over the right of exit from EU federalism in the form of the engineered nation of European. This will be in addition to the movement of foreign nationals into the states who will also have the right of veto (voting, unsurprisingly, to remain within the EU in order to remain within the state wherein they are voting). You may well find that your exit clause is completely meaningless in practice and that, therefore, the only means of reclaiming the former right to national self-determination is by force which would be in the form of a civil war between those who want a nation-state and those who are loyal to the new state of Europa.

  • Greenflag

    Dave ‘

    ‘ I agree that I have an appalling habit of lecturing’

    You have . However your single transferable speeche at bottom is the same i.e a kind of anti EU xenophobia based on out dated notions of ‘sovereignty’ . There is much to criticise in the EU and there is much needed reform but Ireland will do better in negotiating trade agreements with India , China , Russia , Brazil etc as a member of the EU and with the Euro than as a small country whose currency will be prey to every would be George Soros .

    The reality is that it’s only at the supra national level of the EU that the people of Europe can hope to have any defence against the ‘looters’ and speculators of the multi national financial services sector and their Wall St and City comrades in pillage & looting .

    Remember the three commandments motto of the shadow banking fraternity –

    1. ‘Remember always to first pillage then burn ‘.

    2. Leave the rebuilding/refinancing to the public sector and so called democracies and ‘sovereign’ states.

    3. When they become fat and lazy again
    repeat the first commandment.