EU Lisbon plan ready

[eurosceptic]

Bruno Waterfield in his telegraph blog reveals the EU plan for Lisbon.
1) Opt-out from Defence & Foreign policy.
2) Most institutional reform ratified by dail.
3) For the rest: Plan A - Referendum in late 2009 on with an "in or out" theme with figleafs.
Plan B - Croatia's Accession Treaty.
He says the telegraph has seen official documents.

[FutureTaoiseach]

The Greens must put their foot down over this and say no to any part of the Lisbon treaty being passed by the Oireachtas. The FF backbenches must do the same, not that they have finally shown some bottle over medical-cards (even if I didn't fully agree with them over that). The implementation of any part of Lisbon without prior consent by referendum would be totally unacceptable. BTW here is a link to this part of the Telegraph blog.

[McDave]

My guess is that there'll need to be a referendum on part of the treaty. Apart from that it sounds like a runner. Would be confident of a Yes as the bits that need a referendum would be easier to advocate than the whole damned thing.

Anyway, is the Torygraph a reliable source? Or are they just a little too prone to playing silly buggers?

[PhoenixIreland]

1) Opt-out from Defence & Foreign policy.

We won't have to waste more and more money each year on military hardware to satisfy the french arms lobbyists?
Good.

2) Most institutional reform ratified by dail.

I'd question if that was allowed, how can the Dail ratify part of a document rejected by the people directly?
(I don't personally care about the institutional stuff, if it was just that I'd vote yes)

3) For the rest: Plan A - Referendum in late 2009 on with an "in or out" theme with figleafs.

You can't attach two questions to one surely? they can't say vote:

A) Lisbon

B) Out

Thats blackmail.

Plan B - Croatia's Accession Treaty.

Which would pass with no hassle.

[eurosceptic]

Bruno waterfield is a highly respected journalist. While the telegraph is deeply eurosceptical it has reputation as a reliable paper. I would be prepared to believe them on this.

[ibis]

I'd question if that was allowed, how can the Dail ratify part of a document rejected by the people directly?
(I don't personally care about the institutional stuff, if it was just that I'd vote yes)

Lisbon as such was never put to the people - EU treaties never are. What was requested was permission to change the Constitution as required to ratify the Treaty as it stood.

[Tony_1975]

Bruno Waterfield in his telegraph blog reveals the EU plan for Lisbon.
1) Opt-out from Defence & Foreign policy.
2) Most institutional reform ratified by dail.
3) For the rest: Plan A - Referendum in late 2009 on with an "in or out" theme with figleafs.
Plan B - Croatia's Accession Treaty.
He says the telegraph has seen official documents.

An 'in or out' theme is impossible for such a referendum. A referendum must be a choice between the status quo, or a change from the status quo. It cannot be a choice between two different changes. Anyone who says otherwise is full of sh1t. We can have a referendum to leave the EU or continue with Nice, or a referendum to ratify Lisbon or continue with Nice.

Regarding dail ratification, I don't believe the people of Ireland would stand for it, or that FF (or FG) would sacrifice huge amounts of popularity to even try it.

[eurosceptic]

Legally a referendum question must be single barreled with the no choice being the status quo. But Bruno suggests that the chris patten "ratify or we may aswell leave" arguement (see my recent thread on this) will be the plank of the yes campaign.

[FutureTaoiseach]

Lisbon as such was never put to the people - EU treaties never are. What was requested was permission to change the Constitution as required to ratify the Treaty as it stood.

That's meaningless. I would contend that the fact that a referendum was held of itself makes the actual Treaty a constitutional question more so than otherwise. This is because Article 5 of the Irish Constitution states that the Irish people have a right to self-determination. A no vote in a constitutional referendum is an act of self-determination, and that alone would make parliamentary ratification of that Treaty and all parts thereof a violation of Article 5. In that respect, it is important to distinguish between Lisbon and the Single European Act - the Crotty judgement came at a time when a referendum on the SEA had not been held and when the govt had no intention to hold one, whereas an inevitable legal-challenge to partial ratification of Lisbon would be coming after our no vote.

[hiding behind a poster]

I'd question if that was allowed, how can the Dail ratify part of a document rejected by the people directly?

The people weren't asked their opinion on the document. They were asked to vote on amending the Constitution to allow the Oireachtas to ratify the Treaty.