News
Seriously worried over outcome of Lisbon Treaty referendum
THE gang that rules us, the highest paid politicos in Europe, is seriously worried over the outcome of the Lisbon Treaty referendum. The signs are that we will turn it down.
The thing itself is unreadable – but, we are told, we should still vote for it, because our masters know best. The Irish people, however, are not goms and know when they're presented with a pig in a poke. They can see the serious fault lines in the government's Yes campaign.
These can be gathered around a number of issues: the impact on farmers, neutrality, the attack on Ireland's corporate tax base, abortion, and locking us into a European Federal State that will end Ireland's status as an independent sovereign state and make the EU constitution superior to the Irish constitution.
At the back of everything, there's the feeling we're being hoodwinked. Nothing better feeds this perception than the leaked e-mails showing that Irish Government Ministers planned a deliberate misinformation campaign to confuse the public over the treaty implications.
Published by the Irish Daily Mail, the e-mails reveal that the European Commission, on behalf of Ahern, was prepared to ‘tone down or delay’ any announcement from Brussels ‘that might persuade voters to reject the treaty.’
The e-mails admitted that the treaty was ‘largely incomprehensible to the lay reader,’ but had been agreed following consultation with the Irish government and political parties, and that the government saw an advantage in keeping the No campaign guessing as to the date of the referendum. Cynically, Brussels was pleased that ‘the people would not have time to study the text, but would go along with the politicians they trusted.’
The EU feared 'unhelpful developments' during the French presidency, particularly relating to EU defence, but was relieved that the Irish media was 'quiet' on the ratification process.
It's clear that the EU and the Irish government are engaged on a con-job. They do not want a proper debate, nor for voters to have the full information; and they still have to spell out why the treaty is a good thing for Ireland or why voting for it is in our interest.
So far the political parties, except Sinn Fein, have expressed contempt for our democratic right to vote No. Indeed, the European Parliament has said it will ignore the result if they don't like it. The move was supported by our own buckos, including Labour's MEP Prionsias de Rossa.
But it is the Commission's (an unelected bureaucracy) and the government's brazen determination to conceal controversial implementation plans, or to halt them altogether until after Irish voters have gone to the polls, that is most disquieting.
NO WAY JOSÉ!
Under the Treaty our ability to attract technology-focused jobs with low rates of corporation tax – the mainspring of our recent prosperity – will be threatened. Article 93 provides one of a number of back doors to increased taxation. It gives the European Court of Justice the right to make rulings against Ireland's low corporate tax rates on the grounds of ‘distortion of competition.’
José Manuel Barroso, the EU president and ex-Maoist, on his barnstorming tour of the country to whip us into shape for a Yes vote, went to great pains to convince us that Ireland's veto on tax matters would remain unaffected. But, as the Sunday Business Post asked, for how long? Barroso's chum, a Mr Lazlo Kovacs, the commissioner with responsibility for taxation, recently said a common tax base would be a reality by 2010.
Don Berto and the gang haven't told you that little fact, or that a legislative proposal for a common tax base for Europe will be published in September of this year. Or, that the original publication date has been postponed until after the Irish referendum.
So, as in the case of Richard Nixon, would you really buy a second hand car from Barroso? Patricia McKenna, MEP, now kicked out in the cold by her spineless comrades in the Green Party, accused Barroso of 'gross interference' in the internal affairs of this country. She said he lacked credibility because he had not been able to provide a satisfactory explanation for the fact that he received a gift worth thousands of euros from a billionaire businessman who was later in receipt of a regional aid grant.
FARMERS FACING RUIN
Then there's the farming community. Some 10,000 protested in Dublin at the EU-world trade deal to cut tariffs on food imports, thus exposing farmers to lower priced imports. Article 2 gives the EU Commission ‘exclusive competence’ over international trade agreements, while Article 10 makes the 'progressive abolition of restrictions on international trade' a key aim of the EU. So much for Irish farmers!
They've threatened that, unless their interests are protected at the WTO talks, they'll vote against the treaty. Already there's very little support for the treaty among farmers (about 31 per cent according to the polls) – all of which makes Enda Kenny's plea that he does not want the outcome of the referendum to be decided by the WTO negotiations sound ridiculous.
On the one hand the Blueshirt leader criticises EU efforts to lift trade barriers as Irish farming and agriculture will suffer and, on the other, he urges farmers to vote in favour. The Fine Gael position is a mess.
Abortion? The Lisbon Treaty does not include any provision for interfering with Ireland's position on abortion, but the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe singled out Ireland, Malta and Poland for their policies on abortion. Said Kathy Sinnott, MEP: "The Council of Europe is not the EU and its resolutions do not have the force of law in Ireland that EU law does. However, this will encourage the EU to put more pressure on Ireland to change its abortion laws."
SABRE RATTLING
Neutrality? According to Edward Horgan, the Lisbon Treaty, or EU constitution in disguise, will effectively end any pretence of Irish neutrality. The intention, he says, is for an EU army with a NATO overlap to replace the UN as the primary organisation responsible for international peace.
Voting No is not a vote against the European Union. "It is a vote against the militarisation of Europe and for a Europe that should be working to reform and strengthen the United Nations, not undermine it," he said.
Already we're experiencing the financial pinch that the gung-ho characters in the military have created. The defence budget for 2008 is now an appalling §1.078 billion, half of which has been set aside for the Chad adventure. Since the Chad expedition is not under the aegis of the UN, but the EU, we have to fund it ourselves. Can anyone justify that sort of idiocy?
As some commentators point out, Irish troops will be engaged in a war with Africans in an African country and there will be casualties. Last week, an expert on the conflicts in Darfur and Chad, Alex de Waal, warned that Chinese-backed rebels will not be afraid to die in any potential clashes with Irish troops on peace enforcement duties.
And, that's the background against which we're being asked to endorse the Lisbon Treaty. Cover-ups, concealment of the truth, contempt for Irish democracy, silent agreements, a dictatorial power grab by Europe's political elite.
Have we any choice but to vote No?