Compilation of reasons to vote NO to Lisbon 2

[IrishTom]

i would like to see a compilation of reasons and objections to policies contained in the Lisbon treaty, you can use old quotes from politicians who tried to Lie about previous treaties or just list any particular policy you dont agree with that is in Lisbon, i think this would be beneficial to anybody who is anti-Lisbon and will serve as a debating aid to those who wish to actively oppose the treaty.

My objections are based on further militarisation of the EU
Anti-democratic nature of the EU today
Open borders uncontrolled immigration by way of the EU both from whitin the EU and outside of it.
loss of control of our banking system which is dictated by the European central bank.
also the EU now dictates around 80% of the Law in Ireland, this is wrong and should never be acceptable.

[FutureTaoiseach]

It's really the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which will turn the ECJ into a Supreme Court on all remaining areas of human rights where it isn't already. It will be a death-blow to the Irish Constitution and reduce us to a state of the Union in the American sense, but without the constitutional checks and balances of the US system. It's really the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which will turn the ECJ into a Supreme Court on all remaining areas of human rights where it isn't already. It will be a death-blow to the Irish Constitution and reduce us to a state of the Union in the American sense, but without the constitutional checks and balances of the US system. On the Charter itself, here are my objections:

The Union recognises the rights, freedoms and principles set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union of 7 December 2000, as adapted at Strasbourg, on 12 December 2007, which shall have the same legal value as the Treaties.

Particular concerns about the Charter include Article 15, which could be used by the ECJ to force Ireland to allow asylum-seekers to work - something currently not allowed. In the current economic circumstances, displacement of Irish labour would increase, and asylum-claims would return to 2002 levels (11,000 per annum) when we last allowed them to work. A system intended for refugees must not become a system of economic-migration for those who failed to get permission to come to our shores. Otherwise, we are ceding sovereignty to persons who have nothing to do with Ireland and have no reason to consider Irish interests.

Freedom to choose an occupation and right to engage in work

1. Everyone has the right to engage in work and to pursue a freely chosen or accepted occupation.

2. Every citizen of the Union has the freedom to seek employment, to work, to exercise the right of establishment and to provide services in any Member State.

3. Nationals of third countries who are authorised to work in the territories of the Member States are entitled to working conditions equivalent to those of citizens of the Union.

Article's 18 and 19 enshrine ECJ interference in our asylum-system:
Article 18 will prevent Ireland withdrawing from the Convention if we believe it is being abused for economic-migration rather than by genuine refugees. Article 19 will effectively allow the ECJ to decide what constitutes a "serious risk" to the safety of the asylum-seeker and what constitutes "inhuman and degrading treatment". Furthermore, the significance of inserting these provisions into EU law is that they come within the ECJ's jurisdiction. As such, the ECJ will be determining whether it believes we are keeping to the Convention in individual asylum-cases. In affect, for all intents and purposes, we will be adding yet another layer of asylum-appeals on top of a system that already takes years in this country. No thanks.

This is the first time the ECJ is being given jurisdiction over fundamental rights. And it is the first time in the history of the EU that the right to asylum - a right flagrantly abused for economic-migration and welfare-tourism - is being enshrined into EU law by a Treaty. Even the European Convention on Human Rights - which defenders of the Charter say the latter is based on - doesn't contain such a right. It is the height of nonsense to allow the ECJ to stick its maw into this sensitive area. There are also ethical questions in terms of the impact of the ECJ on abortion, euthanasia etc. owing to provisions in the Charter such as the right to privacy:

Respect for private and family life

Everyone has the right to respect for his or her private and family life, home and communications.

This can be expected to result in challenges in the ECJ on the basis that deportation of bogus asylum-seekers with children in this country would undermine "respect for family life". We have already seen attempts by illegals in this country to use the Irish Constitution's provisions on the right of the child to the 'company of its parents' to obstruct deportations from this country, and we can expect that provisions such as Article 7 of the Charter will be latched onto by asylum-lawyers as another loophole they can exploit in challenging deportations in the ECJ. Furthermore, the right to privacy was the basis of the Roe v Wade judgement in 1974 by the US Supreme Court.

Right to marry and right to found a family

The right to marry and the right to found a family shall be guaranteed in accordance with the national laws governing the exercise of these rights.

For the first time, the Lisbon Treaty specifically enshrines the Charter of Fundamental Rights into EU law:

The Union recognises the rights, freedoms and principles set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union of 7 December 2000, as adapted at Strasbourg, on 12 December 2007, which shall have the same legal value as the Treaties.

Particular concerns about the Charter include Article 15, which could be used by the ECJ to force Ireland to allow asylum-seekers to work - something currently not allowed. In the current economic circumstances, displacement of Irish labour would increase, and asylum-claims would return to 2002 levels (11,000 per annum) when we last allowed them to work. A system intended for refugees must not become a system of economic-migration for those who failed to get permission to come to our shores. Otherwise, we are ceding sovereignty to persons who have nothing to do with Ireland and have no reason to consider Irish interests.

Freedom to choose an occupation and right to engage in work

1. Everyone has the right to engage in work and to pursue a freely chosen or accepted occupation.

2. Every citizen of the Union has the freedom to seek employment, to work, to exercise the right of establishment and to provide services in any Member State.

3. Nationals of third countries who are authorised to work in the territories of the Member States are entitled to working conditions equivalent to those of citizens of the Union.

Article's 18 and 19 enshrine ECJ interference in our asylum-system:

The right to asylum shall be guaranteed with due respect for the rules of the Geneva Convention of 28 July 1951 and the Protocol of 31 January 1967 relating to the status of refugees and in accordance with the Treaty establishing the European Community.

1. Collective expulsions are prohibited.

2. No one may be removed, expelled or extradited to a State where there is a serious risk that he or she would be subjected to the death penalty, torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 18 will prevent Ireland withdrawing from the Convention if we believe it is being abused for economic-migration rather than by genuine refugees. Article 19 will effectively allow the ECJ to decide what constitutes a "serious risk" to the safety of the asylum-seeker and what constitutes "inhuman and degrading treatment". Furthermore, the significance of inserting these provisions into EU law is that they come within the ECJ's jurisdiction. As such, the ECJ will be determining whether it believes we are keeping to the Convention in individual asylum-cases. In affect, for all intents and purposes, we will be adding yet another layer of asylum-appeals on top of a system that already takes years in this country. No thanks.

This is the first time the ECJ is being given jurisdiction over fundamental rights. And it is the first time in the history of the EU that the right to asylum - a right flagrantly abused for economic-migration and welfare-tourism - is being enshrined into EU law by a Treaty. Even the European Convention on Human Rights - which defenders of the Charter say the latter is based on - doesn't contain such a right. It is the height of nonsense to allow the ECJ to stick its maw into this sensitive area. There are also ethical questions in terms of the impact of the ECJ on abortion, euthanasia etc. owing to provisions in the Charter such as the right to privacy:

Respect for private and family life Everyone has the right to respect for his or her private and family life, home and communications.

This can be expected to result in challenges in the ECJ on the basis that deportation of bogus asylum-seekers with children in this country would undermine "respect for family life". We have already seen attempts by illegals in this country to use the Irish Constitution's provisions on the right of the child to the 'company of its parents' to obstruct deportations from this country, and we can expect that provisions such as Article 7 of the Charter will be latched onto by asylum-lawyers as another loophole they can exploit in challenging deportations in the ECJ. Furthermore, the right to privacy was the basis of the Roe v Wade judgement in 1974 by the US Supreme Court.

Right to marry and right to found a family
The right to marry and the right to found a family shall be guaranteed in accordance with the national laws governing the exercise of these rights.

This will be used by the ECJ to prevent member states from restricting marriages-of-convenience by illegal immigrants attempting to gain residency in countries like Ireland. We already have a preview of this from the Metock case (2008) where Irish law requiring non-EU spouses to have had prior residency in another EU member state as a condition of gaining residency here. The govt claims to be attempting to close the loophole, but this could well reopen it.

Right to education

1. Everyone has the right to education and to have access to vocational and continuing training.
2. This right includes the possibility to receive free compulsory education.
3. The freedom to found educational establishments with due respect for democratic principles and the right of parents to ensure the education and teaching of their children in conformity with their religious, philosophical and pedagogical convictions shall be respected, in accordance with the national laws governing the exercise of such freedom and right.

This will compel Ireland to provide free education for the children of failed asylum-seekers. It could also be used to challenge deportations of such children with their parents on the supposed basis it would impinge on the "right to education/free compulsory education" including on the basis that free compulsory education does not exist in their countries of origin.

Non-discrimination

1. Any discrimination based on any ground such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation shall be prohibited.
2. Within the scope of application of the Treaty establishing the European Community and of the Treaty on European Union, and without prejudice to the special provisions of those Treaties, any discrimination on grounds of nationality shall be prohibited.

This will be used to challenge deportation-orders in the ECJ. I am opposed to discrimination on all those grounds except nationality, because every nation state discriminates through conferring certain rights on its citizens relative to non-citizens. That does not make such discrimination "racist". It will be argued in the ECJ that deportations are discriminatory because they are only practiced against foreign-nationals. Again, we are opening the door to abuse of our asylum system and to dictation of our asylum and citizenship laws from the ECJ in Luxembourg. Indeed it is possible these provisions will allow the ECJ to overturn the Citizenship referendum of 2004 which removed the automatic right to Irish citizenship on grounds of birth on this island. That would be another attack on democracy in addition to the disrespect shown to the Irish no vote.

. The rights of the child

1. Children shall have the right to such protection and care as is necessary for their well-being. They may express their views freely. Such views shall be taken into consideration on matters which concern them in accordance with their age and maturity.
2. In all actions relating to children, whether taken by public authorities or private institutions, the child's best interests must be a primary consideration.
3. Every child shall have the right to maintain on a regular basis a personal relationship and direct contact with both his or her parents, unless that is contrary to his or her interests.

I welcome the above except from experience in this country we know such rights-based provisions will be used by bogus asylum-seekers to challenge their deportations including on grounds of the supposed economic-right to live in a First World country. You cannot credibly deny that with the Charter, a new world is upon us in terms of European integration. For the first time, the ECJ will assume all the functions of a Supreme Court, ruling on practically all areas of fundamental human rights - and interpreting them as they see fit. No wonder constitutional-law expert Gerard Hogan predicted to the Forum on Europe that the Charter would 'eclipse' the Supreme Court.
Originally Posted by Article 6 TEU (as amended by Lisbon)
The Union recognises the rights, freedoms and principles set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union of 7 December 2000, as adapted at Strasbourg, on 12 December 2007, which shall have the same legal value as the Treaties.

These are the Lisbon provisions on the role of national-parliaments, none of which allow them to block EU legislation, rendering them toothless:

"TITLE II PROVISIONS ON DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES
Article 8
In all its activities, the Union shall observe the principle of the equality of its citizens, who shall receive equal attention from its institutions, bodies, offices and agencies. Every national of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union. Citizenship of the Union shall be additional to national citizenship and shall not replace it.
Article 8a
1. The functioning of the Union shall be founded on representative democracy.
2. Citizens are directly represented at Union level in the European Parliament.

Member States are represented in the European Council by their Heads of State or Government and in the Council by their governments, themselves democratically accountable either to their national Parliaments, or to their citizens.
3. Every citizen shall have the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union. Decisions shall be taken as openly and as closely as possible to the citizen.
4. Political parties at European level contribute to forming European political awareness and to expressing the will of citizens of the Union.
Article 8b
1. The institutions shall, by appropriate means, give citizens and representative associations the opportunity to make known and publicly exchange their views in all areas of Union action.
2. The institutions shall maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society.
3. The Commission shall carry out broad consultations with parties concerned in order to ensure that the Union's actions are coherent and transparent.
4. Not less than one million citizens who are nationals of a significant number of Member States may take the initiative of inviting the Commission, within the framework of its powers, to submit any appropriate proposal on matters where citizens consider that a legal act of the Union is required for the purpose of implementing the Treaties.
The procedures and conditions required for such a citizens' initiative shall be determined in accordance with the first paragraph of Article 21 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Article 8c
National Parliaments shall contribute actively to the good functioning of the Union:
(a) through being informed by the institutions of the Union and having draft European legislative acts forwarded to them in accordance with the Protocol on the role of national Parliaments in the European Union;
(b) by seeing to it that the principle of subsidiarity is respected in accordance with the procedures provided for in the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality;
(c) by taking part, within the framework of the area of freedom, security and justice, in the evaluation mechanisms for the implementation of the Union policies in that area, in accordance with Article 64 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and through being involved in the political monitoring of Europol and the evaluation of Eurojust's activities in accordance with Articles 69k and 69h of that Treaty;
(d) by taking part in the revision procedures of the Treaties, in accordance with Article 33 of this Treaty;
(e) by being notified of applications for accession to the Union, in accordance with Article 34 of this Treaty;
(f) by taking part in the inter-parliamentary cooperation between national Parliaments and with the European Parliament, in accordance with the Protocol on the role of national Parliaments in the European Union

In that context, here is the aforementioned Protocol:

Protocol ON THE ROLE OF NATIONAL PARLIAMENTS IN THE EUROPEAN UNIONTHE HIGH CONTRACTING PARTIES,
RECALLING that the way in which national Parliaments scrutinise their governments in relation to the activities of the European Union is a matter for the particular constitutional organisation and practice of each Member State;
DESIRING to encourage greater involvement of national Parliaments in the activities of the European Union and to enhance their ability to express their views on draft legislative acts of the European Union as well as on other matters which may be of particular interest to them,
HAVE AGREED UPON the following provisions, which shall be annexed to the Treaty on European Union, to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community:
TITLE I
INFORMATION FOR NATIONAL PARLIAMENTS
Article 1
Commission consultation documents (green and white papers and communications) shall be forwarded directly by the Commission to national Parliaments upon publication. The Commission shall also forward the annual legislative programme as well as any other instrument of legislative planning or policy to national Parliaments, at the same time as to the European Parliament and the Council.Article 2
Draft legislative acts sent to the European Parliament and to the Council shall be forwarded to national Parliaments.
For the purposes of this Protocol, ‘draft legislative acts’ shall mean proposals from the Commission, initiatives from a group of Member States, initiatives from the European Parliament, requests from the Court of Justice, recommendations from the European Central Bank and requests from the European Investment Bank for the adoption of a legislative act.
Draft legislative acts originating from the Commission shall be forwarded to national Parliaments directly by the Commission, at the same time as to the European Parliament and the Council.
Draft legislative acts originating from the European Parliament shall be forwarded to national Parliaments directly by the European Parliament.
Draft legislative acts originating from a group of Member States, the Court of Justice, the European Central Bank or the European Investment Bank shall be forwarded to national Parliaments by the Council.
Article 3
National Parliaments may send to the Presidents of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission a reasoned opinion on whether a draft legislative act complies with the principle of subsidiarity, in accordance with the procedure laid down in the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality.
If the draft legislative act originates from a group of Member States, the President of the Council shall forward the reasoned opinion or opinions to the governments of those Member States.
If the draft legislative act originates from the Court of Justice, the European Central Bank or the European Investment Bank, the President of the Council shall forward the reasoned opinion or opinions to the institution or body concerned.
Article 4
An eight-week period shall elapse between a draft legislative act being made available to national Parliaments in the official languages of the Union and the date when it is placed on a provisional agenda for the Council for its adoption or for adoption of a position under a legislative procedure. Exceptions shall be possible in cases of urgency, the reasons for which shall be stated in the act or position of the Council. Save in urgent cases for which due reasons have been given, no agreement may be reached on a draft legislative act during those eight weeks. Save in urgent cases for which due reasons have been given, a ten-day period shall elapse between the placing of a draft legislative act on the provisional agenda for the Council and the adoption of a position.Article 5
The agendas for and the outcome of meetings of the Council, including the minutes of meetings where the Council is deliberating on draft legislative acts, shall be forwarded directly to national Parliaments, at the same time as to Member States' governments.Article 6
When the European Council intends to make use of the first or second subparagraphs of Article 48(7) of the Treaty on European Union, national Parliaments shall be informed of the initiative of the European Council at least six months before any decision is adopted.Article 7
The Court of Auditors shall forward its annual report to national Parliaments, for information, at the same time as to the European Parliament and to the Council.Article 8
Where the national Parliamentary system is not unicameral, Articles 1 to 7 shall apply to the component chambers.TITLE II
INTERPARLIAMENTARY COOPERATION
Article 9
The European Parliament and national Parliaments shall together determine the organisation and promotion of effective and regular interparliamentary cooperation within the Union.Article 10
A conference of Parliamentary Committees for Union Affairs may submit any contribution it deems appropriate for the attention of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission. That conference shall in addition promote the exchange of information and best practice between national Parliaments and the European Parliament, including their special committees. It may also organise interparliamentary conferences on specific topics, in particular to debate matters of common foreign and security policy, including common security and defence policy. Contributions from the conference shall not bind national Parliaments and shall not prejudge their positions.

As I have already said - none of this confers on national parliaments - either individually or collectively - any power to block EU legislation.

[TwoTonneTonyGalento]

Here are some quotes :

Dick Roche :

“Our partners understand, I believe, that we cannot and will not put the same package to our people later this year.”

Michael Martin :

"We will not be asking people to vote on the same proposition."


But what is happening?? ... it's exactly the same rejected treaty being put before us again.




Following the result of the last referendum when he didn't get his 'desired' answer, 'smart man' Sarkozy fumed about the Irish:

"They are bloody fools.....''



Regarding the 'supposed' guarantees :

''Nothing in the declarations materially affects the treaty text. If there was a material difference, then the Treaty would have to be re-ratified in all the other member states”. - Patrick Smyth, Brussels Correspondent for the Irish Times



EU's Internal Market Commissioner Charlie McCreevy admits that if it was put to other nations to vote on Lisbon, it would be rejected.

"On the other hand, I think all of the politicians of Europe would have known quite well that if a similar question had been put to their electorate in a referendum the answer in 95 per cent of countries would have been 'No' as well," Mr McCreevy told a meeting of accountants in Dublin.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...breaking48.htm