SF Submission to Cowen on Lisbon

[Kerrygold]

Just got this from the SF press office. It outlines it main proposals that the government should press for in any negotiations. They will be holding a media briefing at 3.15 PM.

Sinn Fein will today submit to the Irish government a detailed position paper outlining proposed changes to the Lisbon Treaty.

In addition Dublin MEP Mary Lou McDonald and Dáil leader Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin TD will be hosting a media briefing in Leinster House to take political correspondents through the proposal details.

Sinn Féin believes there is a responsibility on all of us who believe that a better deal is possible, to support and assist the government in their task. Sinn Féin wants to be constructive. We have sought a meeting with An Taoiseach to discuss with him the issues, which we believe can be addressed in a renegotiated Treaty.

Among these changes we wish to put forward are:
· The retention of a permanent Commissioner for all member states
· The retention of the Nice Treaty formulae for qualified majority
voting
· The removal of all 8 self-amending articles including the
simplified revision procedure in Article 48
· The removal of Article 46a giving the EU a single legal personality
· A strengthened protocol on the role of member state parliaments
· A significantly expanded protocol on the principles of subsidiarity
and proportionality including the aims and values of the EU
· Substantial amendments to aspects of the Common Foreign and
Security Policy
· Substantial amendments to the section of Common Defence and
Security Policy
· A new protocol on neutrality
· A strengthened social clause
· A substantially revised protocol on vital public services
· Amendments to articles dealing with public services and state aid
· The inclusion of the European Trade Union Confederation Social
Progress Clause to protect workers rights
· A protocol on Irish tax sovereignty
· Substantial amendments on Article 188 dealing with international
trade agreements including a cast iron veto on mixed World Trade
Organisation
agreements
· A new protocol ending Irelands participation in the European Atomic
Energy Community
· A series of amendments to Articles 10 and 188 promoting the needs of
the developing world in the context of international trade.

[Eddiepops]

Eh, so tear up the treaty and change nothing then? You think the rest of the member states are gonna go for that?
Fair play to them for setting out their bottom line at least

[Keith-M]

At least half of these things aren't even in Lisbon. If the leaders of the no side were so clueless, is it any wonder the followers are moreso.

[Piaras]

Basically we want everything changed and we want to ensure the EU has absolutely no power and goes backwards. Sounds fair

[rockofcashel]

Ye wanted a re-negotiation line, ye got one

[adamirer]

.... which we believe can be addressed in a renegotiated Treaty.

Among these changes we wish to put forward are:
· The retention of a permanent Commissioner for all member states
· A strengthened protocol on the role of member state parliaments
· A significantly expanded protocol on the principles of subsidiarity
and proportionality including the aims and values of the EU
· Substantial amendments to aspects of the Common Foreign and
Security Policy
· Substantial amendments to the section of Common Defence and
Security Policy
· A new protocol on neutrality
· A strengthened social clause
· A substantially revised protocol on vital public services
· Amendments to articles dealing with public services and state aid
· The inclusion of the European Trade Union Confederation Social
Progress Clause to protect workers rights
· A protocol on Irish tax sovereignty
· Substantial amendments on Article 188 dealing with international
trade agreements including a cast iron veto on mixed World Trade
Organisation
agreements
· A new protocol ending Irelands participation in the European Atomic
Energy Community
· A series of amendments to Articles 10 and 188 promoting the needs of
the developing world in the context of international trade.

Well, few of the points are duds / surprising.
1) The commissioner is gone anyway - Lisbon or not. That much has been made clear - so thats a red herring
2) The role for national parliaments was just being introduced... so basically it was a good idea just not expansive enough?
3) aims and values of the EU.. dodgy.. thats close to a constitution.. ahem... Dana & co will be back seeking god...
4) What is 'substantial amendments'? very vague....
5) Neutrality.. the public didn't think that was clear enough, so no difficulty with that.
6) As Crowley pointed out to Higgins, theres no problem with the public services - its still fully in irish remit inc veto on health and education - so what exactly do SF want here - what would be strong enough?
7) tax sovereignty was already agreed, but like neutrality, theres no harm in making it more explicit - no problems there,
8) The EAEE wasn't an issue... this that big a deal??? really???
9) No problem with the developing world bit either....

but the bit about sticking with Nice QMV levels.. not remotely a runner. Might gte the odd exemption, but the whole bag???
But.. that said, at least SF came out and at least expressed an opinion on what it would like.. next?? Libertas??? be interesting to see how the different sides of the NO team compare their 'mandates'.

[Rebel CNC]

Fair dues to them for brass neck - if they stayed out of the debate the "no" majority would have been much greater!

[Aindriu]

Jaysus! When I first read the title of this tread I thought that the Shinners had rolled over and surrendered!

[StripeyCat]

1) The commissioner is gone anyway - Lisbon or not. That much has been made clear - so thats a red herring

Nowhere in Nice 1 or 2 did it say anything about not having an Irish commissioner. Actually maybe it did somewhere in the fine print (you'd need to be insane to read these things cover to cover) but the general voting population of Ireland were not aware that changing the way the commission functions amounts to a loss. So were does it say that a new Lisbon Treaty cannot introduce a rule that each country has to have a commissioner? Lots of other things are being changed...

2) The role for national parliaments was just being introduced... so basically it was a good idea just not expansive enough?

Not clear enough either.

3) aims and values of the EU.. dodgy.. thats close to a constitution.. ahem... Dana & co will be back seeking god...

Only dodgy if they word it in a dodgy way. Why not come out and say what the story is?

4) What is 'substantial amendments'? very vague....

Not really. I think everyone will get the idea.

5) Neutrality.. the public didn't think that was clear enough, so no difficulty with that.

I would think the public would be happier if ALL the stuff about improving military capabilities was taken out. Why would we need this?

6) As Crowley pointed out to Higgins, theres no problem with the public services - its still fully in irish remit inc veto on health and education - so what exactly do SF want here - what would be strong enough?

If there's no problem with it why not say it explicitly in the treaty? "Public services are not up for grabs" in big letters

7) tax sovereignty was already agreed, but like neutrality, theres no harm in making it more explicit - no problems there,

8) The EAEE wasn't an issue... this that big a deal??? really???
9) No problem with the developing world bit either....

Sounds like you are broadly in agreement with the whole thing.

[Oldira]

We should be telling Cowen and his cronies the following:

-We voted No. Go to Brussells and represent your people and get up off your bloody knees. If Europe has a problem with us for voting No there is NOTHING they can do. What can they do? We still have a veto so can veto ANYTHING we like. The Budget, CAP, etc you name it. If we want we can cause numerous problems for the EU unless the decide to respect and more importantly implement the peoples decision. I am ashamed that so many of our senior politicians are taking a cap in hand approach to Europe and almost apologising for our collective decision. Any party or person who would support a re-run of the referendum are nothing but pure unadulderated fascists.
For Gods sake Cowen, get up off your knees!