“On 1 July 2009, Sweden will take over the Presidency of the EU……for six months, Sweden will lead the EU’s work and be responsible for moving important EU issues forward….The Presidency is a unique opportunity for Sweden to lead and influence work on important EU issues. At the same time, the country holding the Presidency must be flexible and prepared to deal with unexpected issues.”
So says the Swedish Government. The key is in the last sentence. In current circumstances to say that this is rather an understatement is itself an understatement.
The Swedish Government is facing a hurricane of uncertainty – indeed several hurricanes. Mr Reinfeldt, the Swedish Prime Minister, and thus from tomorrow the leader of the Swedish Presidency, however appears calm. Indeed he is noted for his calmness. Perhaps has resolved that the Presidency motto should be “Keep Calm And Carry On.”
As the young and popular economist who three years ago was deemed ‘the most admired man in Sweden,’ Mr Reinfeldt may already have secured his place in EU history by being the last of the EU’s ‘rotating’ Presidents.
For if the Lisbon Treaty is ratified (which depends on the Irish voting ‘yes’ in their second opinion referendum on the matter in October, on the sceptical Presidents of Poland and the Czech Republic actually putting pen to paper and confirming what their Parliaments have approved and on the German constitutional court ruling that implementing Lisbon would actually be legal in Germany) a semi-permanent President will come into being who will in practice take over much of the responsibility for leading the Union in the eyes of the world.
Thus Mr Zapatero, the Spanish Prime Minister, who is due to follow Mr Reinfeldt in January next year, may well find that he has to work behind a president imposed by the European Council over his head. He will be thus denied his chance to strut the European stage.
Whether Mr Reinfeldt feels lucky or unlucky that this will probably be the last time a local head of government gets to speak for the whole of Europe is a moot. No doubt he wishes that the political banquet over which he will shortly preside did not contain quite so many poisoned chalices.
Indeed, so many are the poisoned chalices that it is difficult to know where to start. There is of course the recession and the need to keep a steady hand on the tiller, balancing the demands for investment to sustain employment and secure a greener Europe (always a Scandinavian priority) with the need for fiscal prudence. Some economies continue very weak; tensions between the ‘spenders’ and those who adhere to sound money principles need to be reconciled.
What is sure is that whatever the Swedish Presidency does it will be criticised for.
Next comes climate change, Mr Reinfeldt will still be presiding when the next major Climate Change conference takes place on his doorstep in Copenhagen. The EU already has an advanced position on climate change but its delivery is under pressure in these recessionary times.
Speaking during European Green Week in Brussels the Commission President, Mr Barroso, told his audience last week that “action on the economy or action against climate change is a false dichotomy. These economic and environmental challenges must be tackled together….. Low carbon growth must be the hallmark of the post-crisis economy.”
He may think that, Mr Reinfeldt may think that, but trying to persuade motor manufacturers fighting to stay in business, or even whole economies like those of Hungary or Latvia may prove a thankless task.
He will also be thrown the poisoned challenges of raising the EU’s Middle Eastern profile – attempting to calm the turbulent challenges coming out of Iran – and nudging the Israelis and Palestinians – including those living in EU funded Gaza – along the road to peaceful co-existence.
Then of course there are the institutional challenges. The Lisbon Treaty still hangs in the balance. In one sense it will almost be easier for the Swedes if Lisbon is not ratified under their watch. For if it is they will have to marshal candidates for appointment to the positions that will come to be known inevitably as Europe’s President and Europe’s Secretary of State.
Inevitably names will be picked out of a dark hat, in a dark room in the middle of the night and the chosen one (or two) sprung hastily on a largely unsuspecting world in a manner strangely reminiscent of how Soviet leaders used to emerge from the impenetrable recesses of the Kremlin.
Such an undemocratic way of proceeding is not exactly how the transparent and democratic Swedes like to do business. Doing it at all will require a bucketful of clothes pegs for sensitive noses. Moreover, the risk of non-acceptance by the European populace – and of course the European Parliament – could be real.
I am not suggesting that we shall see mass demonstrations on the streets of Stockholm, Berlin and Paris, but folk will nevertheless have plenty to feel aggrieved about as yet again major decisions are taken over and beyond their heads. It will represent yet another example of the EU’s democratic chasm. Somehow Mr Reinfeldt will have to take all this in his stride.
To deal with these turmoils he wanted to be secure in the knowledge that Mr Barroso would be there to help him. But even this is uncertain. For while Mr Barroso has been nominated by the European Council as the President of the next Commission, this is still subject to confirmation by the European Parliament. And over this confirmation a cloud of risk still hovers.
This European Commission is in any case at the fag end of its life, very much in disarray with five of its members having gone, or going, on to better things. Others await release when their terms expire in October. There can be little enthusiasm for work in the Berlaymont.
All of which almost makes you feel sorry for Mr Reinfeldt. He must be hoping that the next six months pass quickly with the minimum collateral damage to his career and that he can return safely afterwards to the security of his Scandinavian fastness.
Tags: European Parliament, Lisbon Treaty, Mr Barroso, Mr Reinfeldt, Mr Zapatero, Swedish Presidency of the EU
#1 by Jan Petter Myklebust on July 1st, 2009 - 8:24 am
The Swedish Turnips note is very good. Is there any way that you can find to cmment on the EU research conference \New Worlds- New Solutions\ tyo be arranged in Lund on July 7-8, 2009: I can mail you the report that is prepared for the meeting-
regards
JSAN PETTER MYKLEBUST
BERGEN NORWAY
#2 by Lawrence on July 1st, 2009 - 11:21 am
Let’s hope and pray God that the Irish people again reject the Lisbon Treaty and consign it to the dustbin of history where it rightly belongs.
Go on Irish people. Tell the eu petty dictators that NO means NO.
Let’s also hope and pray God that there is an election in England before the Irish referendum and that the Conservatives, the UKIP and other eurosceptic parties are elected and that they hold a referendum in the UK to also send the Lisbon Treaty to the dustbin of history.
GO on UK. Save Europe from the eu colonialism and from the eu petty dictators as you have save it from the NAZI regime of which the eu is not only a perfect copy, but far worse.
#3 by Steve Peers on July 1st, 2009 - 12:59 pm
Lawrence – The EU is not only a copy, but far worse than the Nazi regime that brought us the world war and the Holocaust? You need to get a grip, mate, you are giving Eurosceptics a bad name.
#4 by Lawrence on July 1st, 2009 - 9:48 pm
Steve Peers
It really is.
Maybe more sophisticated but still it is worse than the NAZI regime.
#5 by Marcel on July 2nd, 2009 - 8:26 pm
The EU system and construction is politically close to a Soviet style system: it has a politburo, a council of ministers (the Soviet Union had that) and a nearly powerless parliament.
I don’t hold much hope for Ireland saving our democracies again, since they’ve been bullied into thinking the greater EU-Soviet Reich will magically solve all problems (it is worth noting that the EU is very much a cause of, rather than a solution to most problems).
One thing upon which we can all agree however: the EU is not, never has been and was never intended by the political elite to be democratic.
#6 by EUROSTAR on July 6th, 2009 - 3:17 pm
@ Lawrence
I see you are moving directely from anti europeanism to blasphemy, abusing the name of god for your irrational fight against a simply reform treaty, which jsut makes the EU MORE democratic, flexible and transparent. I feel sorry for you, you totally lost it.
As for the article itself – goods as always, I just have a problem with these words: “transparent and democratic Swedes” . Oh yes, they always critizise others and see themselve as almost perfect society but one should notice that they tend to ignore own failures and mistakes. Sweden hasn’t introduced the EURO yet, despite having no negotiated opt out like Denmark or the UK, they are simply a bad role model when it comes to EU related topics. Sweden contributed nothing to the EU, it even ignores EU treaties. As long as this bad attitude towards EUrope won’t change, they are neither democratic nor transparent to me.
#7 by Lawrence on July 6th, 2009 - 4:41 pm
EUROSTAR
It is you and the euphiles that have lost it Eurostar.
I am not abusing the name of God by asking him to help the Irish send the Lisbon Treaty to the dustbin of history to where it rightly belongs.
The eu federalists are constantly trying to construct the united states of europe as a dictatorship to include all the countries in Europe under the dictatorship of the brusselscrats.
I and the others have a right to pray God to liberate us from the second NAZI or rather worse regime which combines the NAZI and the USSR Regimes embodied in one.
If you think that because you believe in the eu and you are ready to let it do whatever with you and your country others are similarly minded you are wrong and we shall do everything we can to get back our independence and freedom, even if it means the destruction of the eu.
The Maltese people were conned into accepting membership by Eddie Fenech Adami the TRAITOR prime minister and Verheugen among others and thus the accession treaty does not bind us.
Either the eu lets us go or we shall make sure the eu dream is destroyed.
We, as every people and country, have an inalienable right recognized and promoted by the UNITED NATIONS to be free and independent from any form of COLONIALISM, and the eu is simply a colonialist dictatorship.
By the way, the lisbon treaty is not a simple reform treaty. It is the ex-constitution hashed up so that the people will not understand it and not demand a referendum.
You can hear Giuliano Amato himself saying this if you go to http://www.cnimalta.org/amatoE.html and download the audio file.
And was it not barroso himself who said that the eu is an empire?
Who wants to live under an empire? Have a look at
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1557143/Barroso-hails-the-European-empire.html
#8 by EUROSTAR on July 6th, 2009 - 7:45 pm
@ Lawrence
Thanks, but just because Barroso called the EU a ” empire ” you believe it? Do you easily believe everything? It is difficult to anyone of us to describe the nature of the EU as it is something new and uinque, something truely sui generis! The USA,China and Russia are much more of an empire than the EU – even if the time of empires is long gone. That’s yseterdays language, just like the term ” colonialism “. All the stuff about the Nazi and USSR – or the USA II- stuff is nonsense. Empty anti EU propaganda with no prove at all. The EU is nothing like that and deep in your heart you know it very well.
You just want Malta to leave the EU – fine, that’s your private opinion ( which is hopefully not shared by a majority of maltese citizens and politicians ) but you don’t have to insult the EU or ignore the truth just because of your personal opposition.
The reform treaty was simply called constitution before the first rejection and is now called Lisbon treaty. That’s no news at all, so what? It is about needed reforms after enlargement – who cares how Brussels names a treaty? It could be called Mars treaty, but the fact that it was created to make the EU BETTER stays a fact and that’s what really counts. Who would seriously reject a better version of the EU in times of a crisis, of global challenges?? No sane human being would, that’s why praying for our doom is blasphemy to me. If the reforms do not come into force, all EU citizens and memberstates will suffer a lot. Europe would risk losing its status as a global player in the 21st century, it would even risk being an independent power. And that’s the ridiculous part – you ask for inpedence ( from the EU ) but you totally ignore the fact that independence without european integration ( also military one ) is EVEN MORE in danger. We need each other to survive, or all of Europe will be destroyed, invaded or at least dominated by non european powers. So, a future without integration and cooperation is impossible – we are too weak for national selfishness and nationalism. That’s why I am pretty sure that Maltese polticians know all this too and will stay part of the integrated EUrope. Especially in times when the chinese influence in Africa grows and no one knows how the muslim world looks like in 20 or 30 years – wil it be more democratic or even more fundamental? These are important questions, especially for Malta I would say, as this dangerous region is its close neighbour – if the region explodes, Malta will be the first one to notice it ….especially if it is isolated and left alone.
Think about it, non europeans will care much less about your independence and rights than Brussles!
Have a look at non european behaviour here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDQo4HzIb7Q
Do you really want such a future?? I certainly don’t!
#9 by Lawrence on July 6th, 2009 - 8:48 pm
EUROSTAR
So you think that colonialism is not more.
SO what do you call it when a country cannot decide in its and its citizens best interests and has to submit to what it is ordered to do by the unelected dictators in Brussels?
It doesn’t matter if the chief Commissioner calls the eu an empire?
It doesn’t matter when one of those who had a very big say in the Lisbon Treaty says that it was specifically made in such a manner so that the people will not understand it and would not demand a referendum?
Is this the democracy that the eu is all about?
This is dermocracy not democracy.
Maybe for you the NAZI USSR and the USE are nonsense, but for many it is not and it cannot be denied that this is what the federalists planned from the very beginning.
As for the lisbon treaty created to make the eu better, why do you think that we want it to be better when it has taken away our independence and freedom? It can go to hell for all we care. It has destroyed everything that we had built through great sacrifices through its policies.
Of course I and many others pray God to curse it and its leaders and destroy them for what they did to us. And you can call our prayers what you like because we do not care. That’s how much we hate the eu and its leaders.
The fact that political parties agree with the eu because it serves their higher echelons to jump on the gravy train does not mean that it is good for the people who have to pay for the eu gravy train.
And if the eu believes that the majority of Maltese citizens still want to remain in the eu, why doe it not take up the challenge and hold another referendum?
Or is it that another referendum is only held if the people decide against what it wants like what happened in Ireland?
The Lisbon making the eu better? Do you mean the ability of the eu to introduce the death penalty and impose it in the member countries?
You mentioned military integration. That’s another reason why we pray for the destruction of the eu. The european countries have brought nothing but destruction through their wars and have brought destruction to Malta through us being a foreigners colony and a military base.
That is why the eu wanted Malta. To make it one of its frontline military bases, but by God let it try to use us as a military base.
Why should we defend its colonialist aspirations to control all European countries and expand its control towards the middle east?
Why should it have its army to intervene worldwide? Is this not a form of colonialist threat to those countries who do not comply with its dictatorial orders?
No Eurostar, we do not care about the eu and its federalist dreams. We only care about OUR country and you can rest assured that we shall get back our independence and freedom and the eu shall pay us reparations for the destruction that it has brought to our country.
No Eurostar, we do not care a hoot about the eu and how it is run and whether it remains a global power. Either they give us back our independence and freedom or we shall continue to work for it to be scrapped to the dustbin of history together with its federalists to where they rightly belongs.
And by God we shall succeed.
#10 by EUROSTAR on July 9th, 2009 - 2:12 am
@ Lawrence
What’s the problem with it? A single seat at the IMF makes sense – together we are stronger, it is as simple as logical. Do you want Malta, Luxembourg, Slovenia or Cyprus to deal with the big ones all on thier own? Now that wouldn’t work for sure. That’s why the luxem. PM JC Juncker very much supports this idea – cause it is escpecially in the interest of smaller EU memberstes. Haven’t you read the arguments in favour of unity?? Unity is hope, power and survival. You really don’t seem to write in EUrope’s interest – pity
#11 by EUROSTAR on July 9th, 2009 - 2:35 am
@ Lawrence
Abou your first comment: I am a federalist and I do not plan a Nazi USSR. I really wonder about your sources, we must live in two different world, as everything you’ve written about the EU is far away from reality and very one sided. You really think nationalism and isolation is the answer to the challenges of the 21st century? I am sorry, but I really think you are clever enough to to think so. Deep inside your heart you know the truth, logic will tell you that there is no alternative to integration, you just need to loock at the other side of the med. sea…..don’t you see all the problems outside EUrope? All the trouble, the war, the brutality, the fights? Do you think you can stay outside this world, as an island of the happy few? Think about the future, think about EUrope and the world in the year 2050! Don’t you think there should be future for EUropeans in the year 2050 or even 2100 too?? The EU of the year 2009 isn’t perfect – that’s why we should do everything we can to make it better, help to create a better version. Together, we can do it. It is truely in our own interest.
#12 by Marcel on July 9th, 2009 - 1:37 pm
@Eurostar
the Lisbon treaty was NOT designed to make the EU better. It was designed to further the destruction of national parliamentary democracy.
Where there is a veto, the national parliament (elected and accountable) has the primary legislative initiative. Where there is no veto, the European Politburo (Commission, unelected and unaccountable) has it.
The Lisbon Treaty removes vetos and is thus a direct attack on national parliamentary democracy. Lisbon was designed so politicians could increasingly centralize powers in Brussels out of reach of the voters.
#13 by Lawrence on July 9th, 2009 - 5:30 pm
EUROSTAR
Yes Eurostar, I and many other Maltese cvitizens want NO integration with the rest of europe.
We want our INDEPENDENCE and FREEDOM back.
We do not want to be ordered from foreign unelected dictators from Brussels.
You just seem not to understand.
WE WANT OUT OF THE EU.
The more you try to defend the eu the more you show us that your interest is in the eu expanding its hegemony over all europe and even perhaps further afield and the more we become resolved to do anything to GET OUT OF THE EU.
We do not care a hoot about the european dictatorship known as the eu.
We didn’t have any problems with other countries and the eu has its problems due to its and some of its member countries colonialist and military interventions in other countries internal affairs.
We stood INDEPENDENT and FREE since we had independence in 1964 and never had problems because we do not interfere in other countries internal affairs.
If you want to work to make it better you have to work without us because we shall continue to work for its DESTRUCTION because it has destroyed OUR INDEPENDENCE AND FREEDOM.
Barroso described the eu as a sort of empire, but he forgot that all empires have crumbled as the eu shall crumble in the not too distant future and we shall make sure to hasten the day so that we shall get back our INDEPENDENCE and FREEDOM.
Have a look at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1557143/Barroso-hails-the-European-empire.html
Barroso hails the European ‘empire’
Giuliano Amato said that the lisbon treaty was purposely made in such a manner so that the people will not understand it and not demand a referendum.
Have a look at http://www.cnimalta.org/amatoE.html and download the audio file to hear Amato say so himself.
This is the DERMOCRACY that the eu is.
And this is the eu DERMOCRACY that we want to leave and by God we SHALL leave whatever the eu and its petty dictators with their local QUISLINGS do.
Eurostar, I know that you know who QUISLING was but if anyone does not have a look at http://www.cnimalta.org/qe.html
That is why we consider the member countries leaders as QUISLINGS because they are doing exactly what QUISLING did to his country.
#14 by Lawrence on July 9th, 2009 - 5:39 pm
EUROSTAR
No Eurosatar, a single seat at the IMF certainly doers NOT make sense. It is another step by those unelected petty dictators to oust the member countries from having their say and look after their own international affairs.
This is another step towards the establishment of the united states of europe curse it, as a federal state where the member countries would have no say in international affairs.
If you or the eu thinks that we are that stupid we certainly are not.
Yes, I want every country to have its own seat and if they want to act together they can get together and do it.
Juncker does not represent me and it is certainly NOT in the interest of the member countries to have a single eu seat. It is only in the interest of the eu.
As for writing in the interests of the eu I and many like me do not care a hoot about the eu and I only write in Malta’s interest.
That’s why we want out of the eu or we shall continue to work to get out even if it means the destruction of the eu.
We do not care a hoot about the eu.
#15 by EUROSTAR on July 10th, 2009 - 3:41 am
@ Lawrence
I am sorry but you start to remind me at Don Quixote, tilting at windmilles. I really wonder about your sources, who’s telling you all these lies about the EU?
Look, I really respect your wish to leave the EU but you should really think about more serious arguments than calling the EU ” Nazi USSR ” or dictatureship – now you even call ALL governments of memberstates ” traitors ” ? Did I get it right? If so, you totally ignore the power and influence of the national states, the EU is only as powerful as the memberstates want it to be – there is no ” EU dictature ” telling memberstates what to do – not only the commission is able to do so.
You also refuse to think about any positive aspect of EU integration, you claim the EU took away your freedom and independence but you didn’t name any serious example. I am living in an EU memberstate too – like most of us do – and I do not think for a minute that I am living without freedom and independence! If you would be right, wouldn’t all of us EUropean citizens suffer that much from this horrible EU dictatures?!
You also say you are only thinking about Maltas interests – well, ok then, despite the fact that it sounds kinda selfish for someone who even calls for the support of god. But what is Maltas interest? Those politicians and experts who say being a part of the integrated EUrope are traitors according to your logic. So you think being isolated is in the maltese interest? But what if isolation isn’t an option anymore? There is globalisation, there is international crime/terror, there are many other international challanges. You can wish for isolation, but my guess is that others would loudly knock on your door sooner or later and that there’d be much trouble if you’d be left all alone, without support and solidarity from fellow europeans.
#16 by EUROSTAR on July 10th, 2009 - 3:49 am
@Marcel
The Treaty of Lisbon confirms three principles of democratic governance in Europe:
* Democratic equality: the European institutions must give equal attention to all citizens
* Representative democracy: a greater role for the European Parliament and greater involvement for national parliaments
* Participatory democracy: new forms of interaction between citizens and the European institutions, like the citizens’ initiative
The treaty also clarifies the relations between the European Union and its member countries.
Greater powers for the European Parliament
The members of the European Parliament are elected by direct universal suffrage every five years to represent the citizens of the member countries. Parliament’s powers have been gradually extended with every new treaty. The Treaty of Lisbon is no exception, giving more powers in relation to lawmaking, budget and international agreements.
Lawmaking: the ‘co-decision procedure’ (renamed ‘ordinary legislative procedure’) has been extended to several new fields. This means that Parliament now has the same degree of lawmaking power as the Council in some areas where it used to be merely consulted or not involved at all. These areas include legal immigration, penal judicial cooperation (Eurojust, crime prevention, alignment of prison standards, offences and penalties), police cooperation (Europol) and some aspects of trade policy and agriculture. From now on, then, Parliament will have a role to play in almost all lawmaking.
Budget: the new treaty confirms the established practice of working with a multiannual financial framework, which Parliament will have to approve in future. It also abolishes the current distinction between ‘compulsory’ expenditure (like direct income support to farmers) and ‘non-compulsory’ expenditure, with the result that Parliament and the Council will determine all expenditure together. This innovation creates a new balance between the two institutions when approving the EU’s budget.
International agreements: under the Treaty of Lisbon, the European Parliament’s assent will be required for all international agreements in fields governed by the ordinary legislative procedure.
A greater role for national parliaments
The new treaty gives the national parliaments greater scope to participate alongside the European institutions in the work of the Union. A new clause clearly sets out the rights and duties of the national parliaments within the EU. It deals with their right to information, the way they monitor subsidiarity, mechanisms for evaluating policy in the field of freedom, security and justice, procedures for reforming the treaties, and so on.
The greatest novelty lies in new power to enforce subsidiarity. Subsidiarity means that – except in the areas where it has exclusive powers – the EU acts only where action will be more effective at EU-level than at national level. Any national parliament may flag a proposal for EU action which it believes does not respect this principle. This triggers a two-stage procedure:
* if one third of national parliaments consider that the proposal is not in line with subsidiarity, the Commission will have to re-examine it and decide whether to maintain, adjust or withdraw it
* if a majority of national parliaments agrees with the objection but the Commission decides to maintain its proposal anyway, the Commission will have to explain its reasons, and it will be up to the European Parliament and the Council to decide whether or not to continue the legislative procedure.
Transparency in the Council of Ministers
National parliaments and citizens will now be able to see which decisions have been taken by which national ministers in the Council, since all its deliberations on legislative matters will be made public.
More participatory democracy
There are already many ways in which European citizens can find out about and take part in the political process of the EU. The newest of these is the citizens’ initiative, whereby one million citizens, from any number of member countries, will be able to ask the Commission to present a proposal in any of the EU’s areas of responsibility. The practical details of this initiative will be worked out once the Treaty of Lisbon takes effect.
The new treaty also recognises the importance of consultation and dialogue with associations, civil society, workers and employers, churches and other non-denominational organisations.
Relations between the EU and its member countries
In answer to a question frequently asked by citizens: “Who does what in the EU?” the treaty stipulates who is to act in which domain – the Union or the member states. Three categories of powers are thus identified:
* Exclusive powers: in fields like the customs union, the common trade policy and competition, only the Union may legislate
* Supporting, coordinating or complementary action: in areas like culture, education and industry, the Union may only support action by the member states (by providing funding, for example)
* shared powers: in other fields, like the environment, transport and consumer protection, the Union and the member states share lawmaking power, not forgetting subsidiarity.
After joining the European Union, countries remain members by choice. The Treaty of Lisbon includes a voluntary withdrawal clause, recognising that the member states may always withdraw from the Union if they wish to.
http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/glance/democracy/index_en.htm
#17 by Marcel on July 15th, 2009 - 4:11 am
* I don’t care that the European institutions must give equal attention to all citizens, I don’t need them, the national institutions work just fine.
* Representative democracy: the EU parliament isn’t democratic (election does not democracy equate), it doesn’t represent a demos and doesn’t have real parliamentary powers. Representative democracy belongs on the national level.a greater role for the European Parliament and greater involvement for national parliaments
* The citizens’ initiative. Wow, as if we couldn’t do a petition and be ignored without the Lisbon Treaty. And no matter what those treaties say, I am not a citizen of the EU.
* EUROSTAR writes: The treaty also clarifies the relations between the European Union and its member countries. Marcel answers: yes it does, and I don’t like it. It’s not a clarification, it is a reversal of the EU/member state relations that makes the EU supreme. That’s bad news to me.
* EUROSTAR writes: The Treaty of Lisbon… giving more powers [to EU Parliament]. Marcel: I don’t want this phony parliament to have more powers, these powers belong at the national level.
* International agreements: I don’t want other countries’ politicians to decide for my country what international agreements we should be a part of. This is a blatant violation of our national sovereignty and high treason by any national politician who approves this kind of rubbish.
* EUROSTAR: The new treaty gives the national parliaments greater scope to participate alongside the European institutions in the work of the Union. Marcel: and they can still be ignored, especially if they can’t get enough to protest in time, and the Politburo (Commission) only has to reconsider, there is no obligation to change anything. Again: these powers belong on the national level.
* EUROSTAR: The greatest novelty lies in new power to enforce subsidiarity. Subsidiarity means that – except in the areas where it has exclusive powers – the EU acts only where action will be more effective at EU-level than at national level. Marcel: we know damn well this is a fig designed to fool people. The EU will use the ECJ as it always does in order to grab more powers. Remember: ECJ judges are all federalists and have frequently dreamt up cockamany explanations of EU treaties to come up with a basis for siding with the EU (as they always do).
* EUROSTAR: After joining the European Union, countries remain members by choice. The Treaty of Lisbon includes a voluntary withdrawal clause. Marcel: all can withdraw now, all that is needed is to unilaterally cancel accession. After Lisbon, one needs the permission of the others to leave, and the others can than levy an arbitrary penalty for doing so.
In short: the EU is not, never has been and was never meant to be democratic. All this legalese jibba-jabba only exists to fool the people into believing that the EU is somehow democratic. And of course, the big elephant in the room: generally speaking, the peoples do not support political integration. Only a lunatic fringe minority does.