It is not so much the court challenge in Germany. Nor is it the Czech and Polish presidents’ will-I-won’t-I sign pen power. Or even the Irish referendum. What is making some EU politicians especially nervous about the fate of the Lisbon Treaty is what is going on in Britain.
With the governing Labour Party expected to do extremely badly in the 4 June local and European elections, the nightmare scenario being considered in some capitals is that there will be an early general election in Britain BEFORE the Irish even vote for a second time on the treaty.
Under this scenario, the election would return the Conservatives to power and they would waste no time calling for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty – the referendum pledge is a central plank of their pre-election campaign.
The treaty would then be rejected by Britain’s largely eurosceptic population and that would be very much that for the bloc’s new set of institutional rules.
Dublin is also keenly aware of this scenario. So far it has been coy about the date of the referendum saying only that it will take place in autumn. This has generally been understood to mean October, and probably mid to late October.
But as Gordon Brown’s popularity ratings plunge, damaged by last month’s unpopular budget, the smear campaign led by his close advisor Damian McBride, and now by a series of expense scandals concerning his party, there may be talk of trying to hold a referendum earlier.
Irish voters, nervous after witnessing the ravaging of Ireland’s economy by the current global crisis, are now generally considered to be more likely to vote Yes this time round.
If a Conservative leader, presumably David Cameron, should come into power while the treaty is not in force, it would be possible to make good on the referendum pledge.
A Conservative win after the treaty is already in force would create a whole lot of problems for the new PM vis à vis the EU expectations of the party faithful. But would be far less problematic for the European Union as a whole.
#1 by Ludwig Görtz on May 8, 2009 - 5:08 pm
Would a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty have succeeded in any EU country?
#2 by al on May 8, 2009 - 7:30 pm
Judging by what happened in the EU Constitution referendum, the answer would be “yes” in certain countries and “no” in certain others. The people do not want this.
#3 by Anne Palmer on May 8, 2009 - 10:03 pm
Even if the Treaty is ratified by all 27 States, should the people of Ireland be the only people in the whole of the European Union to have a referendum, and the allegedly democratic European Union ignoring the people of Ireland’s first referendum result, rather not only puts the EU at odds with the rule of law but also where the Treaties are lodged, be it the Vienna Convention on the law of Treaties (which makes clear that Treaties should be understood by all, and the United Nations. The very constitutional Treaty that it is, deliberately mixed up so that the people could be fooled into believing that it was nothing like the Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe on which a referendum was promised, will not be accepted by the people perhaps not only in the UK, but other Countries. It does not bode well.
#4 by Christine Arron on May 8, 2009 - 10:46 pm
Just in case the Lisbon Treaty doesn’t get through we need a ‘Plan B’.
A two-speed Europe perhaps?
In theory that should keep everybody happy.
#5 by al on May 8, 2009 - 11:38 pm
What’s a “two-speed Europe”, one where the states in high gear have more power and riches than the ones in low gear?
The Lisbon Treaty has been ratified by the politicians, not the people, and was concocted for the purpose of sidestepping the will of the people. If not for Ireland’s law in this matter, it would have been rammed through by now.
#6 by Christine Arron on May 9, 2009 - 12:06 am
Al, in some senses we have a multi-speed Union already. Both the Euro and Schengen are policy areas in which some countries participate but not others, and in both cases some non-members participate as well. Nobody seems to think this is unfair.
You say that the Lisbon Treaty has been ratified by the politicians, not the people – but isn’t that the usual way parliaments work?
#7 by Brian Cowan on May 9, 2009 - 2:18 am
Speed? Ireland being 1% of the EU population must retain her sovereignty at any cost. I don’t want Charlie McCreevy or anyone else to be a “permanent” President of Europe. I don’t want a EU foreign minister or EU legal personhood or any trappings of statehood for that matter. I know what will be voting against. Plan B is Nice and it is going to slow the EU to a crawl which is fine by me
#8 by Giedrius on May 9, 2009 - 10:26 am
Ludwig Görtz
“Would a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty have succeeded in any EU country?”
46% of Irelanders who have not participated in the referendum, haven’t known what the Treaty of Lisbon says.
42% of Irelanders who have voted No haven’t known what the Treaty of Lisbon says.
If educated (objectively) I think they would vote Yes and we can have in mind that the previous referendum was lost in relatively little difference.
So this is what EU should do at the moment, provide the required infrmation and allow Ireland’s citiens to make REASONABLED conclusions .
#9 by Giedrius on May 9, 2009 - 10:34 am
al
“The Lisbon Treaty has been ratified by the politicians, not the people .”
And the Constitution of i.e. UK is approved by people? You’re simply exaggerating. Maybe EU should allow every single citizen to decide wheter to apply the Treaty or not. EU still do not have legal body, but it is asked for more than its member states. And, by the way, decisions to ratify the Treaty with or without referendum were taken by the national governments, not by EU.
Then national governments decide whether to hold referendum or not they should invoke their usual experience and their usual behaviour for the decision making. So that’s what they have done and I see no point why EU should be accused about that.
#10 by Giedrius on May 9, 2009 - 10:36 am
I’m not saying how Irelanders should vote. But what I’m saying is that they really should reconsider their previous position.
I will be very happy if we will get a big Yes.
#11 by Poll on May 9, 2009 - 11:20 am
Please take a survey about EU and its future. It will require about 5 minutes to finish the poll. More votes from more countries allow me to make more objective conclusions.
http://www.polls4u.com/poll/59
Thank you in advance.
#12 by al on May 9, 2009 - 7:09 pm
“Nobody” as in whom? How many voices were heard from in this matter?
You’re correct about the “two-speed” Europe existing already. That’s what happens in an undemocratic superstate; it’s called discrimination. Human rights are even on the way out; note the removal of the writ of habeas corpus by fiat, through trial in absence rules, other stuff like the European Arrest Warrant (which of late has been applied to enforce German laws in the UK), and much more beyond that.
Remember something called the EU Constitutional Treaty? That was put to popular referendum and was defeated. If Lisbon had been given to the people to ratify also, it would have gone down in flames before Ireland got a chance to vote, just like before. Why is the people’s answer wrong?
No. Certainly not in cases where sovereignty is at stake.
And how does one define a “usual way parliaments work” anyhow? There is no uniform way that this happens.
The UK doesn’t have a constitution, so I don’t know what you’re talking about or why you’re bringing that up.
How?
What were the referenda about? Why disallow them the second time around just because they didn’t like the first answer? Plain fact is, they do not respect what the people want.
Where do all the regulations and directives come from? I don’t think the Commission, Parliament and Council are imaginary.
What is asked for?
I didn’t say that the EU ratified the treaty by itself; in fact, I didn’t mention the EU’s government in Brussels, apart from their influence on national governments to ratify the Treaty without consulting their people.
No, that’s not what they have done. You don’t change the usual practice mid-stream (i.e. remove referendum where it already has been held). And you don’t allow the entity in Brussels to supersede your national laws, whether by treaty or other means (but if you’re Germany, you can bully Brussels, funny enough).Besides, the greater point is what is being foisted on the people. The Brussels government is not democratic, and it is treason for (presumedly) democratic parliaments to sell their countries to such a power.
I don’t understand that. It’s OK if it’s a dictatorship?
Since the constituents have no say, how can it be as democratic as they?
#13 by Julien on May 9, 2009 - 7:25 pm
al, what are you talking about?
In EU it’s the elected national government heads (the counsil) that makes all the decisions. If every damn government in the EU is a dictatorship then EU will be the same don’t you get it?
You can see it that way: You ve said that German laws are enforced to the UK. OK but who has enforced that laws? Not the germans, nor the EU. It’s the UK government, the upper and lower house that has to “enforce” the laws by ratifing or by implementing compatiple laws.
If UK government is a dictatorship, I suggest you to revolt. If not, and all the other eu goverments are dictatorships, vote the UKIP to take you out of this “dictatorship”.
Makes sense now?
#14 by Julien on May 9, 2009 - 7:31 pm
As for the second referendum, cause I’m tired listening to the same arguments: In democracy people can change it’s mind, otherwise we would vote only once in our life. Situation chages, we are changing, everything changes.
There are some modifications. Minor? maybe. If still Irish are not happy they can vote so once more time, not a big deal.
#15 by Lawrence on May 9, 2009 - 8:40 pm
Congratulations Al
Julien
why do the eu petty dictators not respect the peoples decision and make them hold another referendum and are ready to continue doing so until they get what they want and do not give another referendum to all the member countries people to see whether they still want to remain in the eu?
Because they know that the result will be the scrapping of the eu and their gravy train that’s why.
As for most of the politicians I believe it was Napoleon who had said that every man has his price.
As for German laws being imposed upon the people, AL is right.
Have you ever heard about the eu criminal law known also as the Corpus Juris that the eu is introducing bit by bit through stealth in its various regulations?
Al referred to Habeus Corpus and the European Arrest Warrant.
These are found in the Corpus Juris which first saw the light of day in April 1997 when it was introduced to a specially invited audience at a Seminar of the Instituto Europeo de Espana. In the accompanying official programme it laid out the objectives as follows:
« FIRSTLY: it seeks to call the attention of jurists in general to the need for effective protection of the Community budget, particularly in connection with fraud against subsidies; and SECONDLY: the organisers wish to make known the content of the CORPUS JURIS for protection of these financial interests which has been conceived as the embryo of a future European Criminal Code. »
Having a future European Criminal Coded only means that the eu is turning itself into a federal state, into the United States of Europe behind the backs of the people of the member countries.
The Corpus Juris also provided for the setting up of the European Prosecutor and Delegate European Pubic Prosecutors in all the major cities of all member countries.
It also provided for the detention of a person for up to six months which can be extended for further periods of three months at a time without any maximum limit.
The person could be transferred to any other member country that the European Public Prosecutor could decide without any extradition procedures.
Provision was made for the surveillance of all telephones, faxes, internet, e-mails and any means of communication.
It also provided for the jury system where the accused would be judged by professional judges and not by a jury.
The Corpus Juris also provided for the person being tried more than once for the same offence, doing away with the principle of ne bis in idem or as is known in the USA double jeopardy.
The Corpus Juris provided for the accused being considered as guilty until proved innocent which is the continental system especially the German system and not as in the British system where the accused is considered as being innocent until proven guilty.
This is known as the INQUISITORIAL system which shifts the onus of proof on the accused to prove that he is innocent contrary to the accusatorial system where it is the prosecution that has to prove that the accused is guilty.
These are some of the provisions that the eu envisaged in Corpus Juris and which are all being introduced through stealth by the eu petty dictators Julien.
Do you want to live in such a dictatorship Julien?
#16 by Julien on May 9, 2009 - 10:39 pm
Lawrence I don’t try to make fun, honestly.
Firstly that document is not an EU law as the European procecutor in not (yet) in action. If I’m not mistaken it’s a proposal for the Lisbon Treaty. And personally I don’t find anything suspicious in the text you posted. So I’m still in favor of the lisbon treaty.
Secondly, “corpus juris” in this context means simply “body of law”. It’s just a legal term.
I thought you was refering to the “4th holly roman empire” theory
#17 by Julien on May 10, 2009 - 1:49 pm
and No we don’t want an empire. Not even the hard core federalists want that. Just a better place is all that we want.
#18 by Christian on May 10, 2009 - 4:12 pm
According to this article, Britain has a “largely Eurosceptic population”. So why no chance of any sort of UK vote since 1975? Someone would have to be over 50 to have voted – and that was only a narrow victoriy in favour of joining what was not supposed to be much more than a “friendly” trading block. Where was the referendum that the Labour Party (UK) promised in their manifesto?
The nearest chance I’ve ever had to voting on something EU-related is the EU initiative for a ‘North-East Regional Assemby’ (we don’t have regions in England). Four-fifths of us said “no” we don’t want it. But I better we get it, sooner or later.
#19 by Julien on May 10, 2009 - 5:02 pm
yeap Cristian, you should ask your government for a new referendum. Things are constantly changing. Especially since 1975.
#20 by Steve Peers on May 11, 2009 - 10:09 am
The Corpus Juris is just a draft drawn up by academics. While the Lisbon Treaty does provide for power to adopt rules to establish a European Public Prosecutor, each state would have a veto over that legislation, and the UK, Ireland and Denmark would have opt-outs. So it is far from certain that the EPP would be set up if Lisbon were ratified; if it were set up, the rules might be quite different from the Corpus Juris; and whatever the rules were, the UK and Ireland can just opt out of them in any case.
The bottom line is that the Corpus Juris draft is not really a relevant argument against (or for) the Lisbon Treaty.
Plus – the idea of regional assemblies in England is not an EU initiative. Maybe there is a resolution of the Committee of the Regions or something saying that regional assemblies are a good thing, but from a formal legal point of view the EU has no powers in relation to whether Member States have regional or state governments or not and what powers those levels might have.
#21 by Steve Peers on May 11, 2009 - 7:46 pm
You cannot compare the European Arrest Warrant with the Corpus Juris, which was a much more integrated proposal and solely concerned with EU fraud.
As for the European Arrest Warrant itself, there are a number of grounds for refusal besides whether it was issued by the relevant authorities. On the issue of the relevant offences, there is a list of 32 offences where there is no check on dual criminality (ie whether the act in question is criminal or not in the requested state), otherwise there can be (and usually is) a check on this point. There is a procedure to execute the warrant, but it is simplified as compared to the previous extradition procedure, rather than non-existent.
#22 by Rob O'Loughlin on May 12, 2009 - 12:06 pm
No matter which party you vote for the agenda will continue regardless. It’s a fools choice to cover-up the country is bankrupt and being run by Rothschild and co. The media, government, judiciary, bankers and police have become criminal fraudsters and murderers and all are out of control and unwanted. Governments NEVER work and the EU and UN are just more stepping stones to a one world corporate fascist state. Every problem facing the world could be turned around tomorrow. But everyone seems to love their monetarised labour slavery. We have become a race of fools.
#23 by Steve Peers on May 12, 2009 - 2:24 pm
The Corpus Juris is not an ‘imposition’ of anything on anyone as long as it is an academic draft. And as I said, the only way it would apply in any form if the Treaty of Lisbon were ratified is by means of unanimous approval of all participating Member States to a proposal establishing a European Public Prosecutor, and the UK could opt out of the proposal in any event. So it could not be said that anything to do with the EPP could or would be ‘imposed’ on any state.
As for the European Arrest Warrant, I don’t agree with abolishing the dual criminality requirement, but since the measure was adopted (as it had to be) by a unanimous vote of the Member States, it can’t be argued that the EU is eroding State sovereignty. To the extent that states have lost sovereignty, they agreed to it – ie the UK’s decision to cede sovereignty to the USA on extradition issues which has nothing to do with the EU, and the UK released a discussion paper on extradition in 2001 which made it clear it would probably anyway have adopted a national law doing away with most safeguards on extradition unilaterally, even if the European Arrest Warrant had not been agreed.
#24 by John Wheatcroft on May 12, 2009 - 6:03 pm
Who the hell wants to be part of the European Superstate anyway ?
I don’t – the only reason the Irish might say yes this time is that the European have screwed the Irish economy, to MAKE them say yes this time round.
The Irish should stand firm and still say “No” to Europe.
Isn’t it funny how whenever you do not vote the way which “The Illuminati” want you too, two things happen:
1. Your economy gets screwed
2. You get asked to vote again & again
(Until you come up with the answer “they”want)
Makes voting look pretty staged really.
#25 by Jan F on May 12, 2009 - 7:39 pm
It must be scary being an Irish voter – 500m eyes and the future of the national sovereignty of 27 (and rising) countries resting on your shoulders.
#26 by Jan F on May 12, 2009 - 7:40 pm
CORRECTION:
Sorry 1 billion eyes, 500 million PAIRS of eyes!
#27 by Mogens on May 12, 2009 - 7:50 pm
I’d like to know why such a proud country as Ireland, that struggled for decades to escape from the clutches of an empire, would gift away that sovereignty with the stroke of a pen?
Voting under the Lisbon Treaty is based on population, so Ireland will have only 1% of the vote (i.e. no significant say in anything).
The Lisbon Treaty gives the EU superiority over national constitutions and the power to increase its own power. What value will the Irish opt outs have?
#28 by Anti-EU-voter in Norway on May 12, 2009 - 9:42 pm
EU’s version of voting democracy is a parody. If a country votes against the union, they’re asked to vote again next year on the same thing and then vote correct. That is a fascistic way to run a so called democracy.
That is one of the reason I say no to EU like the majority of the Norwegian population.
#29 by Gunter on May 12, 2009 - 11:39 pm
I have a feeling that the Irish will be making up their own minds, indepedently of Brits, Norwegians or EU supporters! Good for them.
At present – according to the poll below – 54% of Irish votes will say “yes” and 24% will say “No” and 22% “Don’t know”.
But things could change, of course.
————–
Lisbon Treaty Would Pass in Ireland
April 25, 2009
http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/33312/lisbon_treaty_would_pass_in_ireland/
#30 by nick on May 12, 2009 - 11:43 pm
its already a signed deal
http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=All+Legislation&title=european+union&searchEnacted=0&extentMatchOnly=0&confersPower=0&blanketAmendment=0&sortAlpha=0&TYPE=QS&PageNumber=1&NavFrom=0&parentActiveTextDocId=3490003&ActiveTextDocId=3490003&filesize=44258
take a look…
fortunately statute legislation is NOT Law and only effect lawyers and ‘Persons\ and Not Humans -
#31 by nick on May 12, 2009 - 11:46 pm
decided long long ago…..
http://www.infowars.com/leaked-1955-bilderberg-docs-outline-plan-for-single-european-currency/
#32 by Henryk on May 12, 2009 - 11:57 pm
If Ireland do decide to vote “Yes” and the Lisbon Treaty proves to be a big improvement and not The End Of The World – what will the Eurosceptics say?
Of course, there’ll be no need to say anything, we’ll all be able to relax and move forward.
#33 by Denis B. on May 13, 2009 - 6:41 am
The Citizens of the Irish Republic are no fools when it it comes to money, etc. Many of us WILL NOT live in servitude to a cabal of manipulative, soul-less controllers. If Brussells expects us to be grateful for toll-roads and shoppings centres then they’ve got another thing coming. NO to Lisbon 2… Saoirse!!!
#34 by Dada on May 13, 2009 - 4:26 pm
Denis B,
That’s good. Unfortunately most people are quite happy to be bought off by consumer junk, celebrities, access to global culture, a big new out-of-town shopping centre and a pair of designer Mctrainers.
Sad really.
#35 by Mick on May 16, 2009 - 4:38 pm
Julien made a comment supporting the EU asking the Irish to vote twice (see above):
QUOTE “In democracy people can change it’s mind, otherwise we would vote only once in our life. Situation chages, we are changing, everything changes.” UNQUOTE
A good point. The UK had a referendum in 1975. As it is OK to change your mind, can we have another one now please? We are now nearly 35 years further on and a Brit would have to be over 50 to have voted in the last referendum. The EU under the Lisbon Treaty is a bit different from the EEC (a “friendly trading block”).
Regarding that 1970s EEC referendum, I notice that it was only allowed AFTER the UK was already in the EEC.
#36 by Jan-Eric on May 27, 2009 - 6:30 pm
Weren’t there a lot of comments on this article? They seem to have vanished. Explanation?
#37 by Jan-Eric on May 28, 2009 - 6:46 pm
OK, the comments are back!
#38 by Sean Murtagh on June 2, 2009 - 7:32 am
We in Ireland rejected the treaty and will do so again by an even bigger margin the next time; the fact is we just don’t like Dictators!
#39 by D Gannon on September 17, 2009 - 10:58 pm
I’m Irish.
I’m voting YES.
Why?
Becuase I’m SICK OF BEING TOLD WHAT TO DO BY ENGLISH TORIES!
STOP trying to run MY COUNTRY!!!
#40 by Peter on September 19, 2009 - 12:39 pm
If I was Irish I will vote NO?
Why? Because the Irishe vote once last year. Nigel Frage tell why should the Irish vote again NO:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEOFTz_Nnas
#41 by Mike on September 29, 2009 - 2:09 pm
1. I agree with the above Comments which
said that
2. ALL is a Trick
3. of a Bunch of BUREAUCRATS
4. INVENTING Jobs for themselves
5. at OUR expenses
#42 by MK on September 30, 2009 - 12:34 am
Say goodbye to your borders.
“A few months ago, the EU’s Justice and Security Commissioner Franco Frattini worried about what to do with illegal immigration. To no-one’s surprise, he appears to have settled for surrendering and making it legal. The skilled glossocrat Frattini has already banned the use of the phrase Islamic terrorism: “You cannot use the term ‘Islamic terrorism,’” he insisted. “People who commit suicide attacks or criminal activities on behalf of religion, Islamic religion or other religion, they abuse the name of this religion.” He now thinks we shouldn’t use the word “immigration,” either, we should talk about “mobility.” Moreover, the “Asian” and “African” immigrants in this case generally come from the predominantly Muslim countries of North Africa and the Middle East, with some additional ones from Pakistan and similar nations.
The EU has thus decided to flood Europe with tens of millions of Muslims, at the same time as peaceful Europeans demonstrating against the Islamization of Europe were brutally harassed by the police in the EU capital of Brussels.”
EU told to accept 20m migrant workers
The Financial Times, 12 September
Europe must relax its immigration controls and open the door to an extra 20m workers during the next two decades, the European Union’s justice chief will say on Friday.
http://www.globalpolitician.com/23537-euroimmig
#43 by MK on September 30, 2009 - 12:35 am
The EU has thus decided to flood Europe with tens of millions of Muslims, at the same time as peaceful Europeans demonstrating against the Islamization of Europe were brutally harassed by the police in the EU capital of Brussels.