Eugene’s Blog: Cóir and the Primacy of EU Law

A new element has been introduced to the Lisbon Debate by an organisation, Cóir, relating to the primacy of EU law and I raised this issue in the Seanad today.

Reference has been made by Cóir to a Declaration 17 of the Lisbon Treaty, which reiterates the existing position on the primacy of EU law.  This is what we signed up to when we joined the European Union in 1973.  The wording in our Constitution resulting from the referendum of 1972 states that, no EU law can be invalidated if it is necessitated by our membership of the community.  That principle was established before we entered the community by a court judgment, Costa v. ENEL, in 1964.

 The declaration refers to that case and implies that to have a community where EU law does not have primacy would be meaningless.  Why adopt laws at European level if they cannot be applied and enforced throughout the community? 

On the basis of this false premise this organisation is suggesting that abortion could be introduced by the European Court, although the court is in fact bound by the express wording of the Lisbon Treaty, which specifically acknowledges the Irish constitutional prohibition of abortion.

Cóir also suggests that same-sex marriage may be introduced in Ireland. However, the wording of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which forms part of the Lisbon Treaty, specifically states that such issues will be decided in accordance with national law.  Thus, it is for this House and the Dáil to decide on same-sex marriage. 

It is also suggested that ratification of the Lisbon Treaty could result in harmonisation of taxes, including corporation taxes.  Again, the European Court of Justice has already pronounced on this issue in the case of Cadbury Schweppes, in which it was judged that tax competition is a reality and that resolving it is a political rather than a legal matter.  In addition, we know that we have a veto on tax harmonisation.  

 Cóir needs to get its facts straight.

It is Likely That the Taoiseach Will Fluff This Referendum

The Taoiseach’s remarks about the opposition parties needing to intensify their campaigns on the Lisbon Treaty represent a defining moment in the campaign.

Even if he did not correct the situation in the Dáil yesterday, I believe he must mend his hand. If this is turned into a partisan and divisive campaign, we will have a difficulty. 

When he was Minister for Foreign Affairs the Taoiseach was director of elections for the first referendum on the Nice Treaty and he is now responsible for the referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. On present form, it is very likely that he will fluff both referenda. I believe the Taoiseach should reflect on this and his outburst yesterday.

There is a national interest in ensuring the referendum succeeds.

Eugene’s Blog: Minister Smith Must Clarify the Government’s Position on the Veto

In this week’s Irish Farmers’ Journal, a poll shows that 78% of farmers are concerned about the WTO talks.  This is largely due to the Government playing games with the issue.  It has not clarified its position on the veto.

The veto does not apply in the case of international agreements on agriculture per se.  The WTO talks pertain to a mixed agreement on goods and services in respect of which the Government does have a veto.  Is this the Government’s understanding of the matter and is it prepared to exercise the veto?  Until the Government makes a clear statement on this issue, farmers will remain concerned and will make a link, however false, with the Lisbon Treaty.

Today in the Seanad I asked the Leader to ask Minister Smith to clarify his understanding of the exercise of the veto in this round of WTO negotiations and state whether the Government is prepared to exercise it.

It has been asked whether the veto will remain after the passage of the Treaty.  The reality is that the Treaty states expressly the Council shall act unanimously for the negotiations and conclusions of agreements in the area of social, educational and health services. This is the link that enables a veto to apply in the present case but if there is a similar mixed international agreement in the future, this provision would apply and a veto could be exercised.  It is important to recognise that the Government has a veto on a mixed agreement and will continue to do so.

The farm organisations and others, including political parties, have made a link between the WTO talks and the Lisbon Treaty.  The reality is that there is no legal link although there is a political one.  Farm organisations must be aware that if they make the political link and persist in doing so, there will be consequences.  It is incumbent on the Government to clarify the position.

The medium-term economic review published this week by the ESRI pointed out the importance of services to our economy.  Agriculture is very important but, according to the review, services now account for 43% of our exports and will account for 60% by 2015.  Therefore, a balanced agreement is important.  We need to achieve a good agreement for agriculture and also for services. I ask that the Minister be specific on these issues.  It is only by his doing so that we can persuade farmers there is no link between the Lisbon Treaty and the WTO round and that the Government will act in their interest in the negotiations. 

Eugene’s Blog: Misinformation on Privatisation of Public Services

Today in the Seanad I raised another issue concerning the Lisbon Treaty.  It is prompted by an article in The Irish Times today in which the former Deputy, Mr. Joe Higgins, claims the Treaty will open the way for privatisation of public services. 

This is the same line that Sinn Féin regularly trots out in its campaign.There are specific provisions in the Treaty on services of general economic interest and services of general interest.  This is totally contradictory to the statements made by Mr. Joe Higgins, Ms Mary Lou McDonald and others from Sinn Féin.  Furthermore, this is entirely different from the line taken by Libertas so there are blatant contradictions on the “No” side.

It is important that the relevant Minister make a statement on the issue of privatisation as it concerns public undertakings and public services.  They are not, and never have been, interfered with by Europe except to the extent that they are required to comply with the competition and Internal Market rules.  

Eugene’s Blog: The Lisbon Treaty is Not Unintelligible- The Taoiseach Should Try Reading It

The Government has launched its campaign and the Taoiseach, Deputy Brian Cowen, has come out on the offensive with regard to the Lisbon Treaty.  The only problem is that he has not read the Treaty and has admitted that he has not done so.  I raised this issue in the Seanad today. 

If one has not read the Treaty, how can one explain it to people and expect them to vote on it?  It is akin to a Minister presenting a Bill in the House without having read it.   

It is not simply a question of not having read the Bill, as this suggests the Treaty is unreadable. Today I read out one or two lines of the Treaty in the Seanad in order to prove that the Treaty is not unintelligible as has been suggested.  People from the private sector, journalists such as Vincent Browne and one Opposition party have claimed it is unreadable and is simply for lawyers and eurocrats. 

However, the aims of the Treaties are set out in clear terms.  The “aim is to promote peace, its values and the well-being of its peoples”.  The Treaty continues on in such language.  Another article states, “competences not conferred upon the Union in the Treaties remain with the Member States”.   It sets out in clear terms the competences of the institutions and the new areas in which the Union is extending its competence with the agreement of Member States, such as climate change and energy security. 

In raising the point of the Taoiseach not having read the Treaty, I am simply trying to be helpful to the Government.  They then could stand on a platform and explain it to people with conviction.  Once it has been explained, I believe people will support it.