New expression of 'commitment' to the European Union in Referendum Bill

[He3]

In case anyone is interested in examining what changes it will bring about to the text of our Constitution here is the amended text of Article 29.4 as it would be if the Lisbon ll referendum were passed. An entirely new element that was not in last year's amendment proposal is subarticle 4 about our 'commitment to the European Union'.



1° The executive power of the State in or in connection with its external relations shall in accordance with Article 28 of this Constitution be exercised by or on the authority of the Government. [unchanged]

2° For the purpose of the exercise of any executive function of the State in or in connection with its external relations, the Government may to such extent and subject to such conditions, if any, as may be determined by law, avail of or adopt any organ, instrument, or method of procedure used or adopted for the like purpose by the members of any group or league of nations with which the State is or becomes associated for the purpose of international co-operation in matters of common
concern. [unchanged]

3° The State may become a member of the European Atomic Energy Community (established by Treaty signed at Rome on the 25th day of March, 1957). [trimmed by eliminating references to EEC, ECSC and SEA]

4° Ireland affirms its commitment to the European Union within which the member states of that Union work together to promote peace, shared values and the well-being of their peoples. [new]

5° The State may ratify the Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, signed at Lisbon on the 13th day of December 2007 (“Treaty of Lisbon”), and may be a member of the European Union
established by virtue of that Treaty. [new]

6° No provision of this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State, before, on or after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, that are necessitated by the obligations of membership of the European Union referred to in subsection 5° of this section or of the European Atomic Energy Community, or prevents laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by—

i the said European Union or the European Atomic Energy Community, or by institutions thereof,

ii the European Communities or European Union existing immediately before the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, or by institutions thereof, or

iii bodies competent under the treaties referred to in this section,

from having the force of law in the State. [modification of present text]


7° The State may exercise the options or discretions—

i to which Article 20 of the Treaty on European Union relating to enhanced cooperation applies,

ii under Protocol No. 19 on the Schengen acquis integrated into the framework of the European Union annexed to that 25 treaty and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (formerly known as the Treaty establishing the European Community), and

iii under Protocol No. 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, so annexed, including the option that the said Protocol No. 21 shall, in whole or in part, cease to apply to the State, but any such exercise shall be subject to the prior approval of both Houses of the Oireachtas. [new]


8° The State may agree to the decisions, regulations or other acts—

i under the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union authorising the Council of the European Union to act other than by unanimity,

ii under those treaties authorising the adoption of the ordinary legislative procedure, and

iii under subparagraph (d) of Article 82.2, the third subparagraph of Article 83.1 and paragraphs 1 and 4 of Article 86 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, relating to the area of freedom, security and justice, but the agreement to any such decision, regulation or act shall be subject to the prior approval of both Houses of the Oireachtas. [new]

9° The State shall not adopt a decision taken by the European Council to establish a common defence pursuant to Article 42 of the
Treaty on European Union where that common defence would include the State. [modified to refer to Lisbon treaty provision]

.........

[europeasone]

4° Ireland affirms its commitment to the European Union within which the member states of that Union work together to promote peace, shared values and the well-being of their peoples. [new]

5° The State may ratify the Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, signed at Lisbon on the 13th day of December 2007 (“Treaty of Lisbon”), and may be a member of the European Union
established by virtue of that Treaty. [new]

So there you have. Voting No is futile. The state can and will ratify the Treaty of Lisbon. Regardless of the outcome in October, the treaty will be ratified. Voting Yes, however, gives Ireland a better stance in Europe when it "formally" becomes federal. Voting No will only damage us in the long term.

[He3]

So there you have. Voting No is futile. The state can and will ratify the Treaty of Lisbon. Regardless of the outcome in October, the treaty will be ratified. Voting Yes, however, gives Ireland a better stance in Europe when it "formally" becomes federal. Voting No will only damage us in the long term.

The old resistance is futile line.

Interesting how if we bought it the last time we would have no Commissioner by now.

And the Swedes would not be sweating over how to deal with cutting the Commission if we vote No again.

The possibility of a No vote in the second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty in Ireland fills Swedish politicians with dread. “How do you think it will go,” asked Sweden’s European affairs minister Cecilia Malmström nervously last week when The Irish Times met her in Stockholm at the launch of the Swedish presidency.

Swedish foreign minister Carl Bildt admitted there was little Sweden could do except wait for Irish voters to decide. “There is no plan B,” he said before issuing a warning that without Lisbon the size of the commission would have to be reduced.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...250171662.html


Now having saved Europe once from a foolish move that it turned out nobody actually supported, we have the chance to do it again.

So once more with feeling.

[Finbar10]

4° Ireland affirms its commitment to the European Union within which the member states of that Union work together to promote peace, shared values and the well-being of their peoples. [new]

This new subarticle seems a rather innocuous addition. Previous constitutional amendments, however, have merely given permission for the ratification of the various previous EU treaties. This is the first time an explicit commitment (and a rather vague and sweeping one at that) to the European Union is put in our constitution. It makes the EU a constitutional objective/commitment. I seriously wonder if this might not have some implications concerning Crotty and the need for referenda on EU treaties. From Crotty it would seem that if a treaty alters the objectives and purpose of the EU in some unanticipated way then a referendum is necessary. But if our own constitution now will have itself an explicit commitment to an ever closer union I wonder will the Crotty judgement cease to be of any practical relevance?

[ibis]

This new subarticle seems a rather innocuous addition. Previous constitutional amendments, however, have merely given permission for the ratification of the various previous EU treaties. This is the first time an explicit commitment (and a rather vague and sweeping one at that) to the European Union is put in our constitution. It makes the EU a constitutional objective/commitment. I seriously wonder if this might not have some implications concerning Crotty and the need for referenda on EU treaties. From Crotty it would seem that if a treaty alters the objectives and purpose of the EU in some unanticipated way then a referendum is necessary. But if our own constitution now will have itself an explicit commitment to an ever closer union I wonder will the Crotty judgement cease to be of any practical relevance?

Unlikely, since the sole basis on which Crotty succeeded was on the foreign policy commitment of the SEA, not on the objectives and purpose of the EU.

[He3]

This new subarticle seems a rather innocuous addition. Previous constitutional amendments, however, have merely given permission for the ratification of the various previous EU treaties. This is the first time an explicit commitment (and a rather vague and sweeping one at that) to the European Union is put in our constitution. It makes the EU a constitutional objective/commitment. I seriously wonder if this might not have some implications concerning Crotty and the need for referenda on EU treaties. From Crotty it would seem that if a treaty alters the objectives and purpose of the EU in some unanticipated way then a referendum is necessary. But if our own constitution now will have itself an explicit commitment to an ever closer union I wonder will the Crotty judgement cease to be of any practical relevance?

A very good question and a perfect example of why we should have had a clear objective explanation of this text before it was guillotined through the Oireachtas.

As Crotty succeeded on the single issue which the Court found not to have been within the contemplation of voters when giving their approval to joining the EEC, this subarticle may well have the effect you describe.

Why is it there?

We are not to be told it seems.

[europeasone]

The old resistance is futile line.

Interesting how if we bought it the last time we would have no Commissioner by now.

And the Swedes would not be sweating over how to deal with cutting the Commission if we vote No again.

The possibility of a No vote in the second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty in Ireland fills Swedish politicians with dread. “How do you think it will go,” asked Sweden’s European affairs minister Cecilia Malmström nervously last week when The Irish Times met her in Stockholm at the launch of the Swedish presidency.

Swedish foreign minister Carl Bildt admitted there was little Sweden could do except wait for Irish voters to decide. “There is no plan B,” he said before issuing a warning that without Lisbon the size of the commission would have to be reduced.

Early setback for Sweden's grand presidential ambitions - The Irish Times - Tue, Jul 07, 2009


Now having saved Europe once from a foolish move that it turned out nobody actually supported, we have the chance to do it again.

So once more with feeling.

What do you not understand here? We will vote on Lisbon until the treaty is ratified. If we cannot ratify by vote, Europe will find a loophole to get past this silly Irish paranoia. Either way, Federal Europe will come in to force - do you not think the best way forward for Ireland is to learn about it and understand the benefits it will bring Ireland instead of delaying the inevitable and causing damage to Ireland as an European member?

[monsieur]

7° The State may exercise the options or discretions—

i to which Article 20 of the Treaty on European Union relating to enhanced cooperation applies,

ii under Protocol No. 19 on the Schengen acquis integrated into the framework of the European Union annexed to that 25 treaty and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (formerly known as the Treaty establishing the European Community), and

[/B]

.........

Crazy stuff and no mention of what this means to citizens who have to suffer the indignity of bully boys at Schengen borders.....who treat us as we deserve with our copy mother U.K. opt- outs......

[TommyO'Brien]

So there you have. Voting No is futile. The state can and will ratify the Treaty of Lisbon. Regardless of the outcome in October, the treaty will be ratified. Voting Yes, however, gives Ireland a better stance in Europe when it "formally" becomes federal. Voting No will only damage us in the long term.

Would you cut out the crap!

The state can only ratify the treaty if authorised by a constitutional amendment and that can only happen if the referendum is passed. If the referendum is lost the state can not ratify the treaty and will not ratify the treaty.

It is bad enough having various posters on the No side (Eurosceptic, Future Taoiseach, etc) completely making up ridiculous far-fetched claims about EU law, without you joining in too from the Yes side.

Your arguments are consistently far-fetched, ill-informed and entirely wrong.
You clearly know nothing about EU law or treaties.

We have had one eintire referendum based on No lies. This site doesn't need you now to start telling Yes lies. There are enough people on this site making wild nonsensical claims that would be laughed out of a court without you joining in.

[europeasone]

Would you cut out the crap!

The state can only ratify the treaty if authorised by a constitutional amendment and that can only happen if the referendum is passed. If the referendum is lost the state can not ratify the treaty and will not ratify the treaty.

It is bad enough having various posters on the No side (Eurosceptic, Future Taoiseach, etc) completely making up ridiculous far-fetched claims about EU law, without you joining in too from the Yes side.

Your arguments are consistently far-fetched, ill-informed and entirely wrong.
You clearly know nothing about EU law or treaties.

We have had one eintire referendum based on No lies. This site doesn't need you now to start telling Yes lies. There are enough people on this site making wild nonsensical claims that would be laughed out of a court without you joining in.

Tommy, let me tell you right now, that it is your type of mentality and personality which cost us the first Lisbon Treaty. You are the type of individual who encourages descension in the ranks of an organisation or political party through ineffective communication of head-strong unrealistic ideals. You are obviously of the old-world mindset and believe that we can just bulldoze the Yes vote again and expect the public to not care or want to know what the treaty is actually about and hope the Yes vote comes in on the day - that is a roll of a dice. We tried it your way the first time and it failed. So this time, we campaign the right way. No smoke and mirrors, no trying to match the disinformation of the No campaign, no deceit. A clear, transparent translation of the treaty to the people of Ireland is the ONLY WAY we will achieve the Yes vote.

So lets start at the beginning. In reference to your statement regarding amendment of the Irish constitution, I refer you to article 48 in The Treaty of Lisbon. This article translates into a self-amending clause. In layman's terms, this means that once the treaty has been ratified, the power to amend the Irish constitution changes hands from sovereign Ireland to Federal Europe. From that point on the European government can choose to change/amend the Irish (or any ratified member state's) Constitution without consulting or informing the people or political parties of that member state.

Tell me in plain English how this is a ridiculous far-fetched claim? It is the truth. If we want the Yes campaign to succeed, we need FULL DISCLOSURE of the treaty and we need to educate the public on all BENEFITS TO IRELAND of ratification and the creation of a more "formal" Federal Europe.