I downloaded the latest draft of the treaty but it is unreadable as it refers to amendments to clauses and sub-clauses in other treaties.

Is there anywhere one can see a comparison document showing the amendments made by this treaty in the context of the other treaties. Anyone who has used deltaview will know what I am on about.

Without a comparison it is very very difficult to know what we are voting on. You can be certain that the TDs don't understand it either. Unfortunately, the referendum allows them to opt out by leaving it up to the people to inform themselves and make their decision.

Just read the Constitution version - its essentially the same as this treaty.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


NAMA: Mortgaging our future to pay for the past.

You can be damn sure, my friend, that the TD's havent a clue whats in it - and couldn't care less either. Luckily for them the party whip will tell them how to vote and the press offices will issue clever statements that they can put their names to!

__________________
'It would be a fine memorial to the men who have died so splendidly if we could, over their graves, build a bridge between North and South...' Major Wille Redmond MP, 1917

And to which the BBC published a potted guide.

__________________
Never let the best be the enemy of the good.

Its such a vast document that looking all this up with their thousands of pages between them is just a pain - although I did so some weeks ago. Essentially the Treaty changes the EU institutions as follows. Since I voted yes to Amsterdam and the 2 Nice referendums, you should take my word for it because it shows I don't come to this with preconceptions:

A: At present, each EU state has one Commissioner each (Nice removed the 2 commissioners each of the big countries). Under the Reform Treaty, this will be replaced with a rotating-commission with only 18 of the 27 EU states having a Commissioner.

B: Around 60 national vetoes are eliminated and replaced with Qualified Majority Voting. The QMV voting system already applies now where the vetoes were removed by previous treaties. However, QMV itself is changed. Under Nice, the requirement on the Council of Ministers to pass legislation by QMV involved 73% of the weighted vote plus a majority of countries. Under Reform, it will require just 65% of the weighted vote including 55% of the countries. Naturally that will make it easier fore the big countries to ram things through that we don't like.

C: The European Court of Justice will gain greatly expanded powers to strike down national laws via the Charter of Fundamental Rights which is going to be legally-binding for the first time. The Charter includes "rights" such as the "right to collective bargaining" and says "collective expulsions are forbidden". The ECJ interprets the Charter under the Treaty, and the Treaty states that EU law supersedes national law. Because of the broad wording of the Charter with many vagueries e.g. will the ban on collective expulsion turn the court into a final court of appeal in asylum-cases based on whether a deportation-order is judged to be "collective" or not? Will the right to collective bargaining lead to laws making it easier to strike like in France, or compulsory union-recognition? I think this is a possibility. It should be further noted that per ECJ case, only 13 of the 27 ECJ judges representing member states actually sit in cases. That means the Irish judge might not have a say over ECJ rulings.

D: Germany's weighted vote on the Council of Ministers increases from 27 to 29. Added to other increases for large states, this weakens the small states especially in terms of the ability to form the required 35%+ to form a blocking-minority.

E: The Treaty explicitly establishes a "European Defence Agency" and calls for a European mutual-defence pact and the upgrading of the armed forces of EU states.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

It doesn't actually. It has an annex confirming that the precedent already established by the ECJ in regard to the primacy of EU law remains unchanged.

The annex reads as follows:

It results from the case-law of the Court of Justice that primacy of EC law is a cornerstone principle of Community law. According to the Court, this principle is inherent to the specific nature of the European Community. At the time of the first judgment of this established case law (Costa/ENEL,15 July 1964, Case 6/6411) there was no mention of primacy in the treaty. It is still the case today. The fact that the principle of primacy will not be included in the future treaty shall not in any way change the existence of the principle and the existing case-law of the Court of Justice.


I've just written a few thousand words on the subject

Paper ballots. with pencils

__________________
1,197 people agree with me.. how many agree with you ?

Damn right

So I'm right. But the reality is this: because the Charter of Fundamental Rights is - for the first time - legally-binding , the ECJ's powers to strike down national legislation are greatly increased. For the first time it wil be able to strike down laws that allow for "collective expulsions" which are expressly forbidden in the Charter. For the first time there will be a "right to collective bargaining" and the court will be the enforcer of that. This is very new and very dramatic and effectively will turn the ECJ from the final court of the single-market into the final court of human rights. Imho that is a step too far towards a Federal State. Yes EU law already has primacy - but the very scope of EU law is being greatly expanded and this is the first time the Charter has been made legally-binding.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

No you are not right. You purposely give the impression that the Reform Treaty provides a new dimension to Community Law in regard to the doctrine of supremacy. It does not, it merely reinforces the position which has been in place since 1974 - probably a large perecentage of your lifetime.