LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Consider the lack of discussion of the following human rights issues in the Lisbon Treaty debate. The question we must ask ourselves is whether wording, on which there is interminable inconclusive debate is the all important consideration?
There is (by decision in Europe) no official consolidated Treaty document and the sides read diametrically opposed meanings into the "incomprehensible" official document.("The most striklng change (between the EU Constitution in its older and newer version ) is perhaps that in order to enable some governments to reassure their electorates that the changes will have no constitutional implications, the idea of a new and simpler treaty containing all the provisions governing the Union has now been dropped in favour of a huge series of individual amendments to two existing treaties. Virtual incomprehensibilty has thus replaced simplicity as the key approach to EU reform. As for the changes now proposed to be made to the constitutional treaty, most are presentational changes that have no practical effect. They have simply been designed to enable certain heads of government to sell to their people the idea of ratification by parliamentary action rather than by referendum." - Dr Garret FitzGerald, Irish Times, 30 June 2007. much more below)
What is more important is the record of European leaders (who admit to hiding the meaning) which is a better guide to what they'll do with the wording- We have many documents "guaranteeing" optimal human rights- our Constitution, The UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights all with vast untapped potential. Do we need another layer. Should the EU be judge, jury and executioner in its own case. That's the american way so any of their war crimes- illegal invasion of Iraq, torture centres- Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib etc are legitimated by themselves. In the recent history of Europe for example, what significant, if any, steps did EU countries take to prevent (when not cheerleading or assisting it) the illegal invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan? What did they or we do to stop the everwidening gap between rich and poor for the last 30 years approx? What did they do to prevent the massive Nato bombing campaign in the Balkans?
While our jobless happily dropped to about 4% in a decade, Germany's and others rose from about 4% to 8% i.e. far greater numbers jobless, etc. What are they doing to deter an attack on Iran which, according to the IAEA, is not breaking the law. Iran might develop nuclear weapons in 5 or 10 years time. Our government is concerned about that possibility, as they were about the fully known (by the UN's members) to be non existant WMD in Iraq. They're not concerned about the 10,000 (thousands on hair trigger alert UN)in the USA with no inspections contrary to law, or those in the Russia (even more) the UK., Pakistan, China, India, Israel (200 undeclared & contrary to law) etc. The campaign against Iran is a replica of that against Iraq- intensely chasing non existant (IAEA) weapons to change the leadership by threat or else by bombing. Sad!
During the '97 election I looked at some unmentioned effects of our decade of previously unimaginable growth and wealth. As far as I was aware the media weren't covering these in any significant way and didn't when circulated.
"Longstanding issues inadequately dealt with in the election campaign" (full text at viewtopic.php?t=21342)
outlined below gave a disheartening picture of the "progress" of the poor and disadvantaged in recent times.
1 Condoning the Iraq Sanctions and collaboration at Shannon with tbe criminal illegal invasion
2 Poverty, equality and democracy
3 The income gap grows inexorably! letter to Taoiseach in 1998, %pay increases & tax cuts are regressive
4 Literacy: No overall improvement in poor youth literacy levels in the last 27 years. Adult Literacy 25%OECD in '97 little improved
5 Alcoholism rising. cost E2.65 Billion 2003. WHO urged reduction. Consumption up by 40% in recent years.
6 Mental health problems. WHO say this is the fastest growing area. Why, no sign of effective solution.
7 Foreign Policy:
Overseas Development Aid: Our failure to meet UN 35 year old target causes tens of thousands of deaths yearly
Millenium Development Goals: Taoiseach pleased with UN Declaration to only halve the numbers dying of poverty by 2017 while $1,000 BILLION is spent on militaries and war
8 Privatisation: Ideology sometimes dictates daft policies. To hell with the public interest
9 Dail: halve the number of TDs. 2 thirds of legislation now made in Brussels. Decentralise it?.
10 Traffic chaos: Silly cycle, more cars more roads more cars more roads more cars endlessly.
Our collaboration in the Iraq Sanctions and criminal illegal invasion- The imperative to immediately end the military use of Shannon was argued conclusively, as outlined in the attachment. The question put- If our politicians fail to end our involvement pre election why could or would they do it afterwards? is being virtually ignored.Too few were aware of that call to achieve critical level of support so a golden opportunity was missed to become a voice for peace and sanity in the international sphere.
A few other longstanding issues not, or inadequately, dealt with in the current campaign are outlined below.
What intrigues me most is- Why successive governments continue to deal with the symptoms of various problems and ignore the fundamental cause(s) e.g.
Constitution Article 40 1. All citizens shall, as human persons, be held equal before the law.
We have equality legislation, an Equality Authority (1999), equality proofing, Equality Centres, many advocacy agencies etc. With the level of resources available, unimaginable 10 or 15 years back, one might have expected the following to have been successfully tackled.
Poverty: After 11 years of a National Anti Poverty Strategy ( the target of the Strategy was to halve the numbers in poverty over a 10 year period, i.e to leave the other half in poverty for at least 10 years, equality? democracy?), and rolling in cash, we're told that about 750,000 are living below the unacceptable (meaning?) poverty line. Is that 3/4 million "equal before the law" or living in a democracy? Well!, a very different kind of "democracy" than for those mentioned below!
The "Living in Ireland report" 2006 (B of I) says there are about 30,000 millionaires here (excluding family homes)
41 citizens with declared incomes over E500,000 pay no income tax, 11 with over a million pay none either.
Those paying tax on their half million plus got an annual bonus of E5,000 plus (over and above what those not in the top tax bracket got) in the last budget, courtesy Pogressive Democrat policy.
We're told the PD leader and Minister for Justice wrote to 400 people (guaranteeing secrecy! why?) looking for a donation of E5,000 for party election funds, no favours given of course. You'd want to be a miserable git not to show your appreciation of that 1% at least 1 year in 5, and especially with the known prospect of a further percent or two should the PDs return to government.
One councillor (not PD) admitted spending E45,000 to get elected in the last Council elections. How many citizens could compete with this. Equal opportunity, democracy, how are you? The well off, including sitting TDs, with relatively high salaries and generous expenses can spend as much as they like prior to the election declaration, and then the E50,000 or so allowed during the campaign. Most citizens couldn't compete with that. So, is it fair? is it democratic?...more at viewtopic.php?t=21342
That review leaves me in no doubt that our concern with human rights is very skewed towards the richest in society. With a long established constitution (with excellent unexploited potential), UN Charter and Universal Declaration of Human Rights all being much ignored why do we need another totally unnecessary layer of similar documents?
WHAT SENIOR EU POLITICIANS SAY ABOUT THE LISBON TREATY
"France was just ahead of all the other countries in voting No. It would happen in all Member States if they have a referendum. There is a cleavage between people and governments... A referendum now would bring Europe into danger. There will be no Treaty if we had a referendum in France, which would again be followed by a referendum in the UK."
- French President Nicolas Sarkozy, at meeting of MEPs, EUobserver, 14 November 2007
______
"The difference between the original Constitution and the present Lisbon Treaty is one of approach, rather than content ... The proposals in the original constitutional treaty are practically unchanged. They have simply been dispersed through the old treaties in the form of amendments. Why this subtle change? Above all, to head off any threat of referenda by avoiding any form of constitutional vocabulary ... But lift the lid and look in the toolbox: all the same innovative and effective tools are there, just as they were carefully crafted by the European Convention."
- V.Giscard D'Estaing, former French President and Chairman of the Convention which drew up the EU Constitution, The Independent, London, 30 October 2007
- the Treaty which would give the EU a Federal Constitution indirectly rather than directly and turn us all ito real EU citizens for the first time
______
" I think it's a bit upsetting... to see so many countries running away from giving their people an opportunity,' Irish prime minister Bertie Ahern said on Sunday 21 October, according to the Irish Independent. 'If you believe in something ...why not let your people have a say in it? I think the Irish people should take the opportunity to show the rest of Europe that they believe in the cause, and perhaps others shouldn't be so afraid of it,' he added. "
- Irish Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, EU Observer, Brussels, 22 October 2007
_______
"They decided that the document should be unreadable. If it is unreadable, it is not constitutional, that was the sort of perception. Where they got this perception from is a mystery to me. In order to make our citizens happy, to produce a document that they will never understand! But, there is some truth [in it]. Because if this is the kind of document that the IGC will produce, any Prime Minister - imagine the UK Prime Minister - can go to the Commons and say 'Look, you see, it's absolutely unreadable, it's the typical Brussels treaty, nothing new, no need for a referendum.' Should you succeed in understanding it at first sight there might be some reason for a referendum, because it would mean that there is something new."
- Giuliano Amato, former Italian Prime Minister and Vice-Chairman of the Convention which drew up the EU Constitution, recorded by Open Europe, The Centre for European Reform, London, 12 July 2007
_______
"Sometimes I like to compare the EU as a creation to the organisation of empires. We have the dimension of empire but there is a great difference. Empires were usually made with force with a centre imposing diktat, a will on the others. Now what we have is the first non-imperial empire." - Commission President Barroso, The Brussels Journal, 11 July 2007
________
"Public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly ... All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way."
- V.Giscard D'Estaing, Le Monde, 14 June 2007, and Sunday Telegraph, 1 July 2007
________
" The most striklng change (between the EU Constitution in its older and newer version ) is perhaps that in order to enable some governments to reassure their electorates that the changes will have no constitutional implications, the idea of a new and simpler treaty containing all the provisions governing the Union has now been dropped in favour of a huge series of individual amendments to two existing treaties. Virtual incomprehensibilty has thus replaced simplicity as the key approach to EU reform. As for the changes now proposed to be made to the constitutional treaty, most are presentational changes that have no practical effect. They have simply been designed to enable certain heads of government to sell to their people the idea of ratification by parliamentary action rather than by referendum."
- Dr Garret FitzGerald, former Irish Taoiseach, Irish Times, 30 June 2007
_______
"The substance of the constitution is preserved. That is a fact."
- German Chancellor Angela Merkel, speech in the European Parliament, 27 June 2007
________
"The good thing is that all the symbolic elements are gone, and that which really matters - the core - is left."
- Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Danish Prime Minister, Jyllands-Posten, 25 June 2007
________
"The substance of what was agreed in 2004 has been retained. What is gone is the term 'constitution' ".
- Dermot Ahern, Irish Foreign Minister, Daily Mail Ireland, 25 June 2007
_______
"90 per cent of it is still there...These changes haven't made any dramatic change to the substance of what was agreed back in 2004."
- Irish Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, Irish Independent, 24 June 2007
________
"The aim of the Constitutional Treaty was to be more readable; the aim of this treaty is to be unreadable ... The Constitution aimed to be clear, whereas this treaty had to be unclear. It is a success."
- Karel de Gucht, Belgian Foreign Minister, Flandreinfo, 23 June 2007
_________
"The good thing about not calling it a Constltution is that no one can ask for a referendum on it."
-Giuliano Amato, speech at London School of Econmics, 21 February 2007
________
In February this year 2008 the European Parliament voted by virtually 4 to 1 – 499 to 129 MEPs, to reject an amendment to a report on the Lisbon Treaty stating that ‘The European Parliament undertakes to respect the outcome of the referendum in Ireland’
Having looked carefully at the conduct of the referendum, I'm certain that it isn't fair . I've asked the Referendum Commission, the Minister for Justice, the AG and others to review the circumstances in the light of the McKenna and Coughlan Supreme Court decisions, and if appropriate, to arrange a rerun regardless of the outcome of the June 12th one.
I've circulated my understanding to all the media but experience tells me it's unlikely to get much if any coverage.
Le gach dea ghui is beannacht, John Fitz
Reply With Quote