[pp.int.general] Lissabon Treaty: very bad news

[Arend Lammertink]

Reinier Bakels schreef:
>> 2008/4/23 Arend Lammertink <lamare at tuks.nl>:
>>
>>>  First of all, we're gonna have to stop this new treaty, which means
>>>  minimally *one* EU country will have to reject the ratification of this.
>>>  Best changes would be Ireland, because these at least have a referendum,
>>>  but in other countries there's always the parliament. Second best
>>>  chances would be The Netherlands and France, since their population
>>>  already said "No" to basically the exact same shit.
>> Too late for us :(
>>
>> (who said "democracy?)
>>



> It is very confusing. There is actually no reason whatsoever to be opposed 
> against ANY constitution for the EU (as the Dutch thought): a constitution 
> is similar to the statutes of a club: it regulates the internal 
> organisation.

No, but it is wrong to adapt a constitution that crosses the rubicon in 
the sense that it puts all the legislative power into the hands of three 
institutions (Parliament, Council and Commission) of which only one is 
effectively democratically controlled *and* at the same time over-rules 
the constitutions of the member states. That basically ends democracy in 
Europe!

As we have seen in the softwarepatent debate, the Council has never ever 
re-voted on a so-called A-item and in our particular case it simply 
ignored the expressly stated wish of two national parliaments at a way 
basically breaking about all of their procedures. According to Prof. 
Lenz they  even voted without voting!! :

http://k.lenz.name/LB/archives/000998.html

"Of course, maybe Mr. Krecké possesses some extraordinary telepathic 
powers we don’t know about. He might be able to read the minds of all 
other delegates. In that case, their vote would reach him in this way, 
and he was not just stating his personal opinion about the result of a 
non-existing vote.

It would also be interesting to find out if at that particular moment 
the results of a vote were "indicated by visual means" as required by 
Article 8 Paragraph 1 b) of the Rules of Procedure.

If we rule out the telepathy possibility, I would like to ask some 
simple questions.

When and how exactly did Spain vote against this proposal in Monday’s 
Council session?

When and how exactly did Austria, Belgium and Italy abstain from their 
vote in Monday’s Council session?

When and how exactly did Poland, Germany, the Netherlands and Denmark 
vote for this proposal in Monday’s session?

The answer to these questions does not seem to be easy.

They are crucial however for the further debate in those Member States 
where the delegates are counted to have voted against the expressly 
stated wish of national Parliaments."


> 
> Due to the incorrect focus, no attention was paid to the content of the 
> proposed constititution. But given the complexicty of any constitution, 
> could the citizens be expect to have a proper judgement about its contents? 

Can the members of the Council be expected to have a proper judgement 
abouts its contents, when there is no *consolidated* version available 
at the time of signing?

The English version is dated april 15, 2008:

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/st06655.en08.pdf

"This publication contains the consolidated versions of the Treaty on 
European Union and of the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union, together with the annexes and 
protocols thereto, as they will result from the
amendments introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon, signed on 13 December 
2007 in Lisbon. It also contains the
declarations annexed to the Final Act of the Intergovernmental 
Conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon."


So, at the time of signing, no minister even READ the treaty, because it 
couldn't be read at that time, since it consisted of about 300 pages of 
amendments to multiple documents totalling over 3000 pages, according to 
this video:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4291770489472554607


> Well, no politician will ever say that citizens lack the knowledge to judge. 
> But I do. I am a lawyer and even I find it utterly complicated. How to solve 
> such a problem? The standard solution is *representative democacy*: elected 
> politicians are supposed to digest law proposals and to pinpoint problems in 
> the publica debate.

At least you can make sure to actualle *tell* the public what the 
supposed constitution actually *does*, which is to create a European 
federation in which democracy is no longer guaranteed, but optional. The 
Council and the Commission have the power with this treaty to decide for 
themselves wether they want to obey to the wish of the elected 
representatives or not. That is not a democracy, that is a dictatorship!

> 
> Still I am no an unconditional supporter of the EU, far from that. Yes, I 
> acknowledge the need for more cooperation between EU member states. I am 
> strongly opposed against the return of nationalism. History has shown than 
> nationalism is bad. It is a reason to make war. Still there is no reason to 
> oppose against a federal Europe per se. Federal states like Germany and the 
> US ae characterised by loose rather than strong ties between their 
> (internal) member states, as opposed to non-federal states such as The 
> Netherlands or France. Belgium and Spain have become federal states fairly 
> recently in order to solve internal problems, by giving more power to their 
> internal member states.
> 
> For the EU, the devil is in the details, not in the principles. The European 
> Parliament is disfunctional: it is invisible, no one knows hat they are 
> doing, and media coverage is minimal. This leads to the "democatic deficit" 
> problem. And the sensitivity of the EU to lobbyists. Another issue is the 
> Commission which is a kind of government that is no government. Those 
> problems must be attacked.
> 

Exactly. And as long as the treaty cannot "prove" to experts as Prof. 
Anthony Coughlan <http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/2773> that it 
guarantees proper democratic principles, the treaty should not be 
ratified. Period.

-- Arend --