Declan Ganley - A tribute I think!

[FutureTaoiseach]

The Labour govt refused to rule out support for CCCTB.

[west'sawake]

West's awake, your chosen username was prescient given your later involvement with the canvass - or was that why you chose it?

Your tribute to Declan Ganley is a little misty-eyed for my tastes but its still a good read and a point well-made. I'm not a fan of his politics or style but I respect him for having a viewpoint and taking a risk and standing up for it. I also liked that in the dying hours of his campaign we got a glimpse of a lighter, dryer, funnier Mr Ganley which is likely more representative of who he is than some of the more fantastical portrayals of him by his detractors. It is interesting that just because he represented a different viewpoint he was subject to personal attacks. But I guess that is a trap we all fall into sometimes so it doesn't mean a conspiracy against him or that being pro-european is anti-democratic. He gave it a go, it worked for a while and then didn't, and now he's leaving the political stage to move on. Stating your case and then holding it lightly - nice.

Mar,

Thanks for yours. No, I had no idea when I joined p.ie that I would be involved in a campaign to elect Delcan Ganley. I was a member of FF up to 1999 about, and resigned in protest at the policy of tax individualisation, among other things. Presently I am F.G voter by default for a General Election, unless there is a party to fill the E.U reform vacuum that is socially conservative, and Centre Right on economic issues.

[molloyjh]

The Labour govt refused to rule out support for CCCTB.

When and where? I would find that very surprising given that they have been so vocally oppossed to it for so long. Although given the stuff that's happening over there maybe I shouldn't be surprised by anything Labour do!

Not that it matters, given that unanimity would be required to make it happen we can block it on our own if we really wanted to.

[FutureTaoiseach]

When and where? I would find that very surprising given that they have been so vocally oppossed to it for so long. Although given the stuff that's happening over there maybe I shouldn't be surprised by anything Labour do!

Not that it matters, given that unanimity would be required to make it happen we can block it on our own if we really wanted to.

They want it to remove the incentive for UK govts to move their HQs to Ireland to avoid tax.

[molloyjh]

They want it to remove the incentive for UK govts to move their HQs to Ireland to avoid tax.

I understand why they would want it regarding corporate tax alright, which is one of the reasons I found it a bit odd that they were so firmly against it. However making direct taxation a competancy of the EU would also give the EU access to each member states income tax etc. and if the UK wasn't willing to give up the Pound for the Euro you can be sure they won't want Europe deciding their income tax rates etc. That still doesn't answer the question of when and where though.

[ibis]

It can be introduced under Apprpximation Of Laws proviosion (to regulate the internal Market) by removing the word fiscal from Article 114 paragraph 2.
This would only require QMV to ammend .

You can't amend the treaties by QMV.

I hate this you made me read the Treaty.

Apologies!

[Cathar]

You can't amend the treaties by QMV.

Apologies!

Tnx
Apologies I didnt read it all last Night but the treaty can be ammended to include fiscal matters. This would require it to be passed by all the individual countries. If it is passed by 80% of the countries it goes to the council to decide on.

[ibis]

Tnx
Apologies I didnt read it all last Night but the treaty can be ammended to include fiscal matters. This would require it to be passed by all the individual countries. If it is passed by 80% of the countries it goes to the council to decide on.

Yes, it would have to be passed by every single country, in the form of either a treaty or a treaty amendment, which, given the gravity of striking out 'shall not apply to fiscal provisions' from the relevant article, would require a referendum here.

If only 80% of countries passed it, it goes to the Council to decide what to do with the unsuccessful proposal (ie bin it, renegotiate and retry, shelve it), not to decide on. If the Council had the power to simply decide "well, we're alrght with it, make it so" there would be no need for the first step.

[Cathar]

Yes, it would have to be passed by every single country, in the form of either a treaty or a treaty amendment, which, given the gravity of striking out 'shall not apply to fiscal provisions' from the relevant article, would require a referendum here.

If only 80% of countries passed it, it goes to the Council to decide what to do with the unsuccessful proposal (ie bin it, renegotiate and retry, shelve it), not to decide on. If the Council had the power to simply decide "well, we're alrght with it, make it so" there would be no need for the first step.

An ammendment to a treaty doesnt reqiure a constutional ammendment. Therefore no referendum required.

[finnharps4life]

id like ganley to stay around just to shake things up