Should we be covering something? Email us your ideas, rumours or comments.

Lisbon Assurances Agreed at Brussels Summit – Lisbon II Vote in ‘Early October’

Read more about: Ireland, Irish Election, Lisbon Treaty     Print This Post

The letter worked it seems – as Cowen and Martin arrive home with a victory over intransigent EU leaders. Spin cycle set to overload for the next 24 hours. “Hard victory” “good deal for Ireland” “heart of Europe” and onward toward a new date for a Lisbon vote.

Agreement on the shape of the deal followed an early morning meeting between Taoiseach Brian Cowen and the British Prime Minister Gordon Brown at which the latter indicated that the British would no longer stand in the way of a reference to a future protocol.

The Irish guarantees will now be enshrined in a formal declaration of the European Council, which itself has legal force, and the summit will also indicate separately in its conclusions a willingness to return to the issue to copperfasten the interpreations of the treaty in the next treaty agreed between member-states, likely to be that providing for Croatian accession in a couple of years.

Not all are happy as Joe Higgins sets about making lots of noise from the Belgian capital.

“What we will witness at the European Council today is an elaborate charade. The so-called guarantees are simply designed to throw dust in the eyes of ordinary people in Ireland to give them the impression that something fundamental has been changed in the Lisbon Treaty compared to 12 months ago. “Absolutely nothing has been changed, not a dot, not a comma in the same document,” he said.

Here comes round two…

Update: The Taoiseach said it will be a vote is likely in early October, woo hoo? Or boo hoo?

Share and Enjoy:
  • digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Furl
  • blogmarks
  • YahooMyWeb
  • Linkter
  • Spurl
  • NewsVine
  • Netscape
  • Reddit
  • TailRank

25 Responses to “Lisbon Assurances Agreed at Brussels Summit – Lisbon II Vote in ‘Early October’”

  1. # Comment by natrium Jun 19th, 2009 12:06

    I have to agree with Joe Higgins,
    All we have, it appears, is a promise, that if we reverse the no vote with a yes vote, then somewhere down the line, they will revisit the guanantee’s, which are now being sought in order for us to hold a second referendum.
    No legally binding protocol has been agreed,only a promise, that it might happen, if we say yes to Lisbon, so we are in fact re running the same referendum.
    It’s a bit like a play on words, for the sake of causing confusion.
    If it’possible to get a legally binding guarantee after the Referendum, why is it not possible to get it, before the Referendum goes back to the Irish people.

    In the original Referendum I voted yes, but now I’m more confused than ever, so at this point I’m a definate ” Don’t Know “

  2. # Comment by Future Taoiseach Jun 19th, 2009 13:06

    The veracity of the guarantees are already under attack, and rightly so. Were the other member state govts acting in good faith, they would agree to annex these guarantees to the Lisbon Treaty itself and to do so before the Irish referendum. Clearly, we are being sold a pup. What happens if Croatia rejects EU membership, which polls show is a possibility? What if Slovenia vetoes Croatian accession because of their maritime-border dispute, which they have threatened to do? Even if they tried to include them in an Icelandic accession treaty, it is still far from certain it will pass there. Polls show that while Icelanders favour opening negotiations on EU membership, they remain divided on actual membership itself. In any case these ‘guarantees’ can be struck down by the ECJ until they are enshrined in the EU treaties themselves and ratified by the member states.

    Even the assurances on taxation do not address the question of destination-taxes which could be imposed in the country where the transaction taxes place – the brainchild of EU Tax Commissioner Laslo Kovacs known as CCCTB (Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base). It has been shelved until after the Irish referendum, but it remains very much in prospect longterm. At one point, Kovacs claimed that two-thirds of member states supported the plan. If successful, it would force exporters from Ireland to pay their corporate-taxes to the countries of sales-destination rather than the country where their headquarters is based. Then there is the elephant in the room – the Charter of Fundamental Rights and its revolutionary elevation of the ECJ to the status of Supreme Court over issues such as asylum and immigration, freedom of speech, capital punishment, industrial relations and family-law. Yes – the assurances make reference to family law. But until they are enshrined into an EU treaty, they won’t matter a dram to the ECJ. We are being asked to take Fianna Fáil and Brian Cowen on trust. I, for one, am not prepared to do that.

  3. # Comment by Damian Hockney Jun 19th, 2009 14:06

    Agree with both respondents, but the key is – will the Irish people be fooled into believing the hype, dutifully relayed by state radio and tv and tame journalists, and by the politicians predicting gloom and doom in the event of voting ‘No’ again? For the sake of the whole of the EU, I hope not. The voters are being invited to vote for the same thing, with the usual pretences of “victory for the plucky negotiators from Ireland” the same happened with the UK in the mid 70s over the referendum, and in the early 90s over Maastricht. Later, of course, all parties admitting that the renegotiations were essentially fraudulent and designed to fool the home electorates into believing that their politicians had done them proud. Shameful, as is this situation. And watch out for the attempt to deny the No campaign proper media coverage this time.

  4. # Comment by Peter Jun 19th, 2009 14:06

    An Irish Bedtime Story for all Nice Children and not so Maastricht Adults

    The Happy Family

    Once upon a time there was a family treaty-ing themselves to a visit in Lisbon.
    On the sunny day that it was they decided to go out together.
    Everyone had to agree on what they would do.
    “So”, said Daddy Brusselsprout “Let’s all go for a picnic!”
    “No”, said Aunt Erin, “I don’t want to”.
    Did they then think of something else, that they might indeed agree on?
    Oh yes they did?
    Oh no they didn’t!
    Daddy Brusselsprout asked all the others anyway, isolating Erin, and then asked her if instead, she would like to go with them to the park and eat out of a lunch basket….

    Kids, we’ll finish this story tomorrow, and remember, in the EU yes means yes and no means yes as well!


  5. # Comment by natrium Jun 19th, 2009 16:06

    The most important agenda for the larger nations in the European Union, is to be a credible player on the world stage, and it can only do this if it has a large Military force, and it is able to, protect it’s own borders.
    To do this, Ireland is very important strategically, because of it’s geographical position, on the fringe of the North West coast of Europe.
    The size of the Island is not important, what is of greater importance to Europe, is the fact that Ireland has a marine shelf, which is 10 times greater than the actual land mass, and the area of this marine shelf, is guaranteed by a United Nations Charter, and in recent years, Irish naval vessel’s have patrolled this area of ocean, on behalf of the European Union.
    Now, imagine the map of Europe, without the protection of this massive back door ?, it would leave the Continent very vulnerable to terrorism, or any other form of attack. and it would be impossible to protect it’s own borders securily.
    So it turns out that not only are we dependent on Europe for survival, The European Union, are just as dependent on us.

    ( So I say, let’s all say no again, I bet there is a plan C there somewhere )

  6. # Comment by Kevin Jun 19th, 2009 19:06

    The Government’s reasons for the NO vote are fake. The one concerning “military conscription” was fabricated by the YES camp during the last campaign. Government ministers and others supporting YES were the only ones who ever mentioned it.
    These reasons are being fed to us by the YES gang on why they think people voted NO. They still don’t get it ? They just have no understanding of why people voted NO and will vote NO once again. They cannot still comprehend that Lisbon was defeated last year.
    My own reasons for voting NO have nothing to do with this pointless list. Our government is attempting to fool us with a web of deceit and lies.

  7. # Comment by Future Taoiseach Jun 20th, 2009 13:06

    There is a problem with the poll on the homepage. When I click on it to vote no “please choose a valid answer” comes up.

  8. # Comment by P O'Neill Jun 20th, 2009 15:06

    Stephen Collins swallowed the spin hook, line, and sinker.

  9. # Comment by Cian Jun 20th, 2009 21:06

    Your not wrong P I can think of no other setting in which Collins would write this stuff.

    The fact that Gordon Brown was apparently trying to block the protocol mechanism on which the Taoiseach had set his heart made the outcome all the sweeter.

    Irish officials hotly rejected the notion that the drama was contrived for political effect. One way or another, the image of “Brian battling for Ireland” against the old enemy and ultimately getting what he wanted was the fillip he needed to get the referendum campaign off on the right foot.

    the IT will do it’s duty for the next few months but the need for cool analysis is virtal in coming weeks. This was a spin victory for Brian the fighter.

  10. # Comment by Betty Jun 20th, 2009 23:06

    The whole thing is one massive con job–either it is the old Lisbon mark one with no change that we are being asked to vote on again which is defeating democracy or it is Lisbon mark two with changes ,in that case all the other countries have to ratify it again. A bit of honesty wouldn’t go astray—I feel it is mark one and if this was admitted we could at least have an honest debate.One reason for the first “NO” was a gut instinct that we were being conned and this charade will just confirm that gut instinct,compiant journalists notwithstanding.

  11. # Comment by Cian P Jun 21st, 2009 12:06

    I heard a very good analogy for the Lisbon guarantees: a used car salesman tells you to buy the car now, and he promises to fix it later. And thats over stating it, cause the reality is the planned protocols don’t change it at all! Nothing substancial on workers rights, militarisation, privatisation etc.

    Full statement from Joe:

  12. # Comment by natrium Jun 21st, 2009 20:06

    I was taken hostage for most of the day, so I may have missed out, but have “The Greens ” gone underground. Given their ante Government stance on this issue, they cannot be amused, or pleased, because it’s a loose, loose situation for them again, pile that on to the scorn, suffered in the recent past. Could this be a legitimate excuse to peddle into the sunset.
    If they did comment publicly, I’d like to know what they said , if anyone can help.

  13. # Comment by Niall Jun 21st, 2009 22:06

    I’m still pissed off with my fellow citizens for thinking we needed these bloody guarantees. The EU member states just agreed to give us what we already had.

  14. # Comment by Niall Jun 21st, 2009 22:06

    PS Is it a joke that whatever answer I choose on the Irish Election Poll, I get a message telling me to choose a valid answer?

  15. # Comment by Sean Murtagh Jun 22nd, 2009 05:06

    I voted No because of my concerns about corporate taxation; if that were to change and I believe it would under Lisbon despite what I am being told! The reality is that there would not be an American company (and they are the ones propping up the economy) left here within one month!

  16. # Comment by Sean Murtagh Jun 22nd, 2009 05:06

    The functioning of the Union shall be founded on representive democracy; article 10.1
    Giving constitutional recognition to the superiority of EU law means that the once sovereign EU member states (like ireland) formally surrender their national independence and democracy and become like provinces or regions of an EU superpower or superstate.
    The constitution has been drafted by a convention of 105 presided over by Valery Giscard d’Estaing — the man who when president of France once accepted a bag of diamonds from the despotic and cannibalistic African ‘emperor’ Jean Bedel Bokassa.
    Most of the 105 members of the convention that drew up this document were committed euro-federalists. They see an EU constitution as a further giant step towards the EU superpower or superstate they regard themselves as architects of.
    Fine Gael’s John Bruton and Labour’s Proinsias de Rossa, were the two representatives from the Irish Dáil that sat on Giscard’s convention. A euro-federalist of the right and a euro-federalist of the left, these two individuals advocate the utmost possible extension of EU law-making by means of qualified majority vote (QMV) on the EU Council of Ministers.

    Article 5 of the constitution make Irish citizens into citizens of the EU. One can only be a citizen of a state.

    Article 6 proposes to give the new EU state the final power to decide what citizens’ rights are. It aims to do this by making the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, which was endorsed politically at the Nice EU summit in 2001, legally binding in EU law. This would entail a further huge extension of EU power, potentially affecting virtually every area of our lives.

    Human rights cover everything — due legal process, trial by jury, freedom of speech and assembly, labour law, property rights, family law, succession, rights relating to children, marriage, migration, asylum, drugs, abortion, euthanasia etc.

    The only reason for seeking to give the EU a human rights competence is the desire to turn it into a kind of state, in which the EU court, like a national Supreme Court, can have the final say on peoples’ rights.

    The truth is that for the euro-centralisers the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights has more to do with power than rights.

    The Court of justice of the EU shall include the court of justice, the general court and specialised courts. It shall ensure that in the interpretration and application of the treaties the law is observed

    Democrats everywhere should sit up and take note of what the eurocrats are planning for them.

  17. # Comment by Niall Jun 22nd, 2009 07:06

    Sean, our corporate tax rates were never in danger and as for increased co-operation on the part of other states in regards taxation, that didn’t even come in under Lisbon. The effect Lisbon had on it was to regulate it better. At the moment, you need a minimum of 8 states to get it going. The only change Lisbon makes is to increase it to 9.

    If somebody told you otherwise, they were just scaremongering.

  18. # Comment by Sean Murtagh Jun 22nd, 2009 12:06

    Sorry Niall but I read the Lisbon Constitution and also more importantly I read Bunreacht na hEireann or the “Irish Constitution” as it is known in English and they are completly incompatably with each other! If you had a Rolls Royce would you awap it for a Lada? Anyway read artiles 3-6, 120-126, 206 and 207, 311and for your amusement read Protocol No 7 on Privileges and Immunities enjoyed by the EU. IT certainly is a transparent organisation!

  19. # Comment by Niall Jun 22nd, 2009 16:06

    I doubt you read the Lisbon constitution Sean, since Lisbon doesn’t have one.

    And what exactly is your point regarding articles 3-6, 120-126, 206 and 207 and 311?

    The notion that Lisbon has any meaningful effect on your corporate tax rates is simply silly. What changes do you imagine Lisbon makes to the status quo in regards our corporate tax rates that would have US companies leaving within a month of Lisbon being passed.

  20. # Comment by Lizzie Jun 22nd, 2009 17:06

    I’ve just been listening to Nigel Farage and as he says, the promises they have made the Irish are not worth the paper they’re written on. I was sent a sinister link today, if true then one reason the EU are so hellbent on getting this Constitution through is the little, under reported matter of the EMP (Euro Mediterranean Project). They have allegedly already agreed that in 2010 when they arrogantly assume you will all have done as you’re told, they will take the surplus and poorer Islamic population and redistribute it among the EU countries. In return they will receive huge payouts (will we see any of it? LOL). I need to read up more about this. They will promise you anything – look at all the empty promises we in the UK have had broken.

    And of course, the NWO needs to get a move on, I hear they want it all done and dusted by 2012 or thereabouts.

    The whole of EU is praying and hoping that the Irish come through for us all – we were in Cyprus last time the referendum results came through and none of the Irish people where we were bought a drink for themselves, they were treated like heroes!

  21. # Comment by Lizzie Jun 22nd, 2009 17:06

    Found the Algerian one – notice Ireland are in the agreeing parties at the beginning of the text (the arrogance stuns me), and it does have human transferring in the text. Mmm.

  22. # Comment by Lizzie Jun 22nd, 2009 17:06

    Don’t for a minute think I’m racist by the way, I have no problem with any culture but I try to fit in with the country’s culture and customs wherever I go and I only expect the same in return from anyone settling in our country.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. Jun 20th, 2009
  2. Jun 21st, 2009
  3. Jul 6th, 2009