Forum on Europe Summary Text

[mmclo]

The Forum on Europe has launched a summary of the Treaty. I would suggest this is made a sticky but previous requests on the IEA text have gone ignored

http://www.forumoneurope.ie/index.asp?l ... docID=1489

[ivnryn]

Wow, that is long ... few will bother to read it. They need a summary of the summary .

[Kf]

This is the Forum on Europe summary which SF, one of the members of the Forum, have dissociated themselves from. They submitted nearly a hundred amendments of which few very incorporated in the final text and so refused to endorse it.

The only significant text change agreed to was to accept that the Treaty was called the Lisbon Treaty not the EU Reform Treaty.

[FutureTaoiseach]

Most of what is here backs up the no arguments I have made, though some of it is yes campaign propaganda. My main objection to it is that it claims not to affect our neutrality - something I dispute. Having read this, I am pleasantly surprised, given what some had warned was biased to the yes side. In fact, most of it seems to back up the arguments for voting no - except the neutrality issue where I disagree strongly with the conclusion that it is unaffected.

But even so, it admits that the QMV voting system is changed to require both 65% of the population of the EU plus 55% of the states. In effect, this is an admission that what I have said is true - that the blocking minority on the Council of Ministers is increased from 27% to 35%, making it harder to block laws we don't want. The reference to the 65% population-requirement also confirms what I have said about Ireland's QMV vote falling from 2% to 0.9%, while the combined share of the vote of the 6 biggest states rises from 49% to 70%, because they have 70% of the EU's population. It also admits we will no longer have an automatic right to a Commissioner. It also states:

The EU is given greater controls in the area of
macro economic policy and additional tools to
curb Member States with excessive budget deficits;

and:

New procedures provide for simplified Treaty
revisions in certain specified areas.

Furthermore on the marginalisation of small states, the rotating Presidency of the European Council is replaced by a president elected by the Council via QMV:

This new position will replace the current system where the
European Council is chaired by the Member State holding the
rotating six-month Presidency of the EU Council. The European
Council will meet at least four times a year (which is the current
practice although it is only required to meet twice a year).
The European Council will elect its President by a qualified
majority vote for a term of 2≥/µ years, renewable once (i.e.
a maximum of five years). This term can be ended by the
European Council in the event of an impediment or serious
misconduct. The President of the European Council cannot
hold any national position - a serving Prime Minister or Head

It also confirms that the unelected Commission will remain the sole body able to initiate legislation. So much for the extra role for the European parliament, which while gaining more vetoes and amending powers will still not be able to even initiate legislation despite its greater democratic legitimacy than the Commission:

The European Commission
The Commission is intended to represent the interests of the
EU as a whole. The Commission:
• is the only EU institution with the power
to initiate the laws on which the European
Parliament and Council have to take a decision;
• administers the budget and manages the
Community programmes;
• seeks to ensure that EU treaties, laws, rules and
decisions are complied with;
• negotiates for the EU in the international trade
and aid areas;
• is independent from and does not seek instruction
from any government or other body.
All this would continue but there will be important changes
to the Commission’s membership.
Currently,
• each of the 27 Member States has one

All would continue...

Loss of Commissioner:

The Commission would comprise a number of members
corresponding to two-thirds of the Member States (unless the
European Council, acting unanimously, decides otherwise).
The Commissioners will be selected on the basis of equal
rotation between Member States. In effect, each Member
State would have a national serving as Commissioner for ten
years out of every fifteen.
Once this new system takes

The European Parliament continues to have the power to accept or reject the Commission as a whole but not individual Commissioners:

The Parliament would continue to have the legal right
to approve or reject the proposed membership of the
Commission, as a body.

Also there is backing in the document for what I have warned sbout in relation to the Charter of Fundamental Rights increasing greatly the powers of the ECJ to meddle in our affairs:

The European Court of Justice (ECJ)
The Court of Justice of the European Union, comprising
the Court of Justice supported by specialised courts, will
continue to be the institution responsible for interpreting
and applying EU law.
1. There will continue to be one judge appointed to the
Court of Justice from each of the Member States (i.e.
currently 27 judges). Under the Treaty, a panel of seven
experts will scrutinise candidates for the Court of Justice;
2. Decisions amending the Court’s Statute or creating new
specialised courts will now be made by QMV and codecision;
3. The Court will have increased powers to impose fines on
Member States for breaches of EU law;
4. There will be somewhat greater scope for actions to be
brought before the Court of Justice, even if the applicant
is not affected individually, as was a condition up to now;
5. The legal status of the Charter of Fundamental Rights
under the Treaty will significantly increase the
jurisdiction of the Court.

Where I take issue with this document, is its unequivocal claim that our neutrality is uneffected by the treaty. That is nonsensical to anyone familiar with Article 28 and its mutual defence clause.

The Treaty also confirms what I have said about the so-called 'new powers' for national parliaments. That the powers are only advisory and that the EU institutions do not have to accept the advice of national parliaments:

National Parliaments will be given at least eight weeks
in which to consider any proposed EU legislation before
it is put to the Council. National Parliaments will receive
key documents such as Council agendas, Commission
communications and the Commission’s legislative
programme.
National Parliaments can vote to issue a ‘reasoned opinion’ on
whether or not a Commission proposal respects the principle
of subsidiarity. Each national Parliament has two votes in
this system (the Dáil and the Seanad will each have one vote).
If at least one-third (currently 18) of such votes are issued,
the Commission’s draft must be reviewed. However the
Commission is not obliged to amend or reject the proposal.
In the case of proposals in the areas of judicial co-operation
in criminal matters and police co-operation, the threshold is
one-quarter of the votes (currently, 14).

It also confirms that even if a majority of national parliaments call for an EU law to be struck down, it will only happen if the Commission and the Council of Ministers agrees to this request i.e. that the advice is non-binding:

If a majority of national parliaments oppose a Commission
proposal as a breach of subsidiarity, and the Council or the
European Parliament agree with them, then the proposal can
be struck down. These two levels of control, known as ‘yellow
cards’ and ‘orange cards’, are set out in a special Protocol.

On the much-vaunted 'citizens initiative', it admits that the Commission is only obliged to "consider" the proposal - so likewise this is non-binding too:

Provision is also made for a “Citizens’ Initiative” where at
least one million citizens from a number of Member States
can invite the Commission to submit a proposal on any
matter where citizens want legislation to implement the
Treaties. The Commission is obliged to consider the proposal.

It admits the ban on Enhanced Cooperation in defence policy no longer applies:

Under the new Treaty, the previous ban on enhanced cooperation
being used in the security and defence area no
longer applies

Alarmingly, the document admits that the Treaty will allow member states to abolish vetoes related to Common Foreign and Security Policy. Well, well:

Secondly, there is a general clause, under which the European
Council could decide unanimously to transfer decisions from
unanimity to the QMV category in any Common Foreign
and Security Policy domain...

The following is true:

In regard to defence within EU borders, the new Treaty also
explicitly states that the security and defence policy will
include the progressive framing of a common defence policy
and that this “will lead to a common defence” when the
European Council unanimously so decides.

I disagree with the next bit:

Any such decision would have to be ratified constitutionally
– which, should Ireland wish to participate in such a
common defence, would require a ‘yes’ in a referendum. The
Treaty does not amend the “Seville Declaration” on Irish
neutrality made at the European Council in 2002.
Any policy in this area would respect the neutrality of
Member States like Ireland would respect the obligations
of other Member States which are part of NATO and fit in
with the security and defence policy established in that
framework.
Pending any European Council decision to move to a

I agree with the next bit being factually true:

... the Treaty
provides for “Closer co-operation” between willing Member
States on mutual defence – this would oblige those States to
go to the aid of a fellow EU country which was a participant
in such co-operation and came under armed aggression.
The European Defence Agency was established by the
Council of Ministers in July 2004 with the aim of supporting
the Member States and the Council “in their efforts to
improve European defence capabilities in the field of crisis
management and to sustain the European Security and
Defence Policy as it stands now and develops in the future”. It
is open to all Member States “wishing to be part of it” – all but
Denmark have already done so.
The new Treaty introduces a new area of solidarity that
would be expected of all EU members. The Solidarity Clause says that the EU and its Member States would act jointly in
a spirit of solidarity if a Member State were the victim of a
terrorist attack or a natural or man-made disaster.The EU would mobilise all its resources, civil and military, to:
• prevent the terrorist threat in the territory of the
Member States;
• protect democratic institutions and the civilian
population from any terrorist attack;
• assist a Member State in its territory at the request
of its political authorities if a terrorist attack
happened;
• assist a Member State in its territory at the request
of its political authorities in the event of a disaster.

One real concern I have mentioned is confirmed in this document, with respect to a loss of sovereignty stemming from the creation of the European Public Prosecutor, whose role comes across as some kind of Federal Prosecutor implying a Federal Judicial System:

At some time in the future, the Council
could decide, by unanimous vote, to set up a European
Public Prosecutor’s Office to track down and prosecute the
perpetrators of, and accomplices in crimes affecting the
financial interests of the EU, with the option of extending
its powers to include serious crime having cross-border
dimensions.

Again on the Charter, the document states that in Chapter III of the Charter it provides:

the right to asylum, and protection in the event of
removal, expulsion or extradition.

This will lead to a flood of legal appeals against deportations from Ireland. No thanks.

As well as:

Chapter IV: Solidarity, which includes:
• workers’ right to information and consultation
within the undertaking;
• the right of collective bargaining and action;

Cue a flood of legal actions by unions demanding union-recognition and more rights to strike, and goodbye US multinationals.

On the Excessive Deficit Procedure, only a unanimous vote on the Council of Ministers could reject a Commission recommendation on a country with an 'excessive deficit':

The Treaty proposes to strengthen the powers given to the
European Commission where Member States have excessive
budget deficits. In the future, the Council would only be
able to diverge from a Commission proposal concerning
the existence of an excessive deficit, by unanimous vote, as
opposed to the present situation where the Commission
makes a recommendation which Finance Ministers do not
have to accept.
The proposals also include a new set of articles

Giving the unelected Commission more power to meddle in our economic policy.

The document confirms the Treaty allows QMV to be further extended by unanimous agreement of the member states:

In addition, there are some specific “passerelle” clauses
– where the European Council, acting unanimously, could
introduce qualified majority voting in specific areas where
unanimity is currently required.

Finally the Treaty confirms the extensive loss of vetoes:

Election of the President of the European Council
by the European Council
Adoption of the list of configurations of the
Council of Ministers by the European Council
Appointment of the High Representative by
the European Council, with the approval of the
President of the Commission.

Decision defining the European Defence Agency’s
statute, seat and operational rules
Decisions establishing permanent structured
cooperation, suspending or accepting new
members
Conclusion of a withdrawal agreement of a Member
State after the approval of the European Parliament
and on the request of the State concerned
Regulations relating to procedures and conditions
required for a citizens’ initiative.
Evaluation measures of the implementation of the
area of freedom, security and justice after simply
informing the European Parliament and national
parliaments.

Administrative cooperation within the area of
freedom, security and justice after consulting the
European Parliament.
Measures concerning border checks
Measures concerning a common European asylum
system
Provisional emergency measures in case of a
sudden inflow of refugees after consulting the
European Parliament
Measures concerning a common immigration
policy
Measures to provide incentives and support
for Member States promoting the integration of
third-country nationals (not including harmonisation
measures)
Measures concerning the judicial cooperation in
civil matters having a cross-border dimension
Measures concerning the judicial cooperation in criminal
Measures to promote and support the action of
Member States in the field of crime prevention
excluding any harmonisation measure.
Regulations concerning Europol’s structure,
operation, field of action and tasks.
Establishment of rules concerning transport.
Measures concerning the creation of European
intellectual property rights to provide uniform
intellectual property rights protection throughout
the EU.

Amendment of some articles of the Statute of the
ESCB.

Incentive measures in the fields of sport.
Incentive measures in the cultural field.

Measures relating to energy policy.

Measures defining the framework for implementing
the common commercial policy.
Negotiation and conclusion of agreements with
one or more third countries or international
organisations in the field of commercial policy.

Urgent financial assistance measures for
developing countries.

Implementation of the solidarity clause in the
event of a terrorist attack or a disaster (on a joint
proposal of the High Representative and the
Commission).

Decision by the European Council on the
Presidency of Council configurations (other than
that of Foreign Affairs).
Amendment of the provisions of the Court of
Justice’s Statute (with some exceptions).
Appointment of the president, vice-president and
members of the ECB Governing Council by the
European Council.
Rules and general principles concerning
mechanisms for control by Member States of the
Commission’s exercise of implementing powers.