‘EUA culpam Tratado de Lisboa pelo fiasco da cimeira europeia‘ sob a presidência espanhola in EU Observer

The US State Department has said that President Barack Obama's decision not to come to an EU summit in Madrid in May is partly due to confusion arising from the Lisbon Treaty.

State department spokesman Philip J. Crowley told press in Washington on Tuesday (2 February) that the treaty has made it unclear who the US leader should meet and when.

"Up until recently, they [summits] would occur on six-month intervals, as I recall, with one meeting in Europe and one meeting here. And that was part of – the foundation of that was the rotating presidency within the EU. Now you have a new structure regarding not only the rotating EU presidency, you've got an EU Council president, you've got a European Commission president," he said.

"We are working through this just as Europeans themselves are working through this: When you have a future EU-US summit meeting, who will host it and where will it be held?" he added. "All of this is kind of being reassessed in light of architectural changes in Europe."

The Lisbon Treaty came into force on 1 December. It created the post of a new EU Council president and EU foreign relations chief in order to give the union a stronger voice abroad.

It kept the institution of the six-month rotating EU presidency as well, with the member state holding the chairmanship to do the bulk of behind-the-scenes policy work in Brussels.

The Spanish EU presidency is being closely watched to see how the EU manages the transition to the new power structure. The EU Council president has so far taken charge of summits in the EU capital. But Madrid was to share the limelight with a few top-level events at home.

The state department's Mr Crowley said the US and Spain have been in touch "directly" to discuss Mr Obama's decision after Madrid learned about it through the media on Monday.

"Obviously, there's been some disappointment expressed by the government of Spain, and we understand that and we'll be working with them on that," he said.

Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Zapatero and Mr Obama are both expected to attend the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington on Thursday. But no bilateral meeting has been announced so far.

The informal event sees some 3,500 celebrities, businessmen, politicians and religious leaders get together in the US capital each year. It is organised by the Fellowship Foundation, a Christian fundamentalist pressure group.

Mr Zapatero, a centre-left secularist, has taken flak for his trip in Spanish media, with the El Pais daily calling his decision to attend the prayer event "shocking."

http://euobserver.com/9/29398

‘O Tratado de Lisboa entrou em vigor‘ in EU Observer

The European Union is celebrating the entry into force of a new set of rules today (1 December), hoping to put a full-stop behind the years of wrangling, set-backs and lowered ambitions that have marked this lengthy phase of institution building.

The Lisbon Treaty, named after the Portuguese capital where it was signed in 2007, is coming into place a full eight years after member states decided that the European Union needed both to address its democratic legitimacy - sometimes described as its democratic deficit - and allow for more flexible decision-making.

Since that time, the European Union has grown by 12 member states to encompass almost 500 million citizens, expanded the area where the euro is employed as the currency to 16 countries, and sees its main challenges as tackling climate change, dealing with the effects of globalisation, and lately trying to exit the economic crisis.

The path to today's ratification however has been far from smooth, leaving the European Union with barely a month since 2001 when the institutional question was not an issue up for debate.

The body of the treaty was drawn up via a one-year convention, hailed at the time for containing a broad mix of representatives including national and European politicians and civil society representatives and headed by former French president Valery Giscard d'Estaing.

But the European Constitution that emerged was in 2005 torpedoed by voters in founding member states France and the Netherlands, shocking the EU and sending everyone back to the negotiating table.

Bumpy path

The resulting Lisbon Treaty contains most of the constitution's innovations but no longer the symbolically important and state-like elements such as an article covering an EU flag and anthem. It was also presented differently as simply an amending treaty, rather than a constitution in its own right.

This is largely a reflection of the nature of the European Union, made up of 27 member states, which to a greater or lesser degree want to further integrate in certain - but not all - areas.

Controversy and delays have continued to dog the treaty even in its new form. It too was rejected, this time by Irish voters in June 2008 who then changed their minds to embrace it a second referendum in the October of the following year. Meanwhile the Czech Republic's ratification, the final of the 27, was a drawn-out process involving multiple court assessments before the eventual reluctant signature by its eurosceptic president.

This meant that news that the treaty could finally to pass into force was marked rather by a sense of weary relief in member states than any sort of celebration.

New posts and new powers for MEPs

Its most prominent innovations include the creation of a permanent president of the European Council and a beefed up foreign policy chief, who will head a new large diplomatic corps.

These posts are supposed to give coherence to the bloc's external policy and supply it with a stronger voice on the world stage, although their success – ultimately awarded to a pair of low-profile politicians - will depend on the ability of member states to form united positions and support the new external policy chiefs.

The arguably more profound change is internally, with member states' ability to veto being markedly reduced and a corresponding significant boost to the European Parliament's powers. MEPs now have a say over a wide range of new areas including farm and fisheries policy, transport, structural funds and justice and home affairs.

Tax, social security issue, citizens' rights, the main aspects of foreign and defence policy and where EU institutions sit geographically are still subject to agreement by member-state unanimity, however.

National parliaments also gain some powers to scrutinise legislation to make sure it is proportionate and being enacted at the right level, while the signature of one million citizens across the EU obliges the commission to look into acting on the issue concerned.

The European Court of Justice gains the powers to rule in the area of freedom, security and justice as well as judging whether member states are implementing EU laws according to the Charter of Fundamental Rights – a rights document that all member states except Britain, Poland and the Czech Republic have signed up to.

The treaty, so long in the making, has both ardent proponents and vehement critics. Its admirers say it will make internal EU decision-making easier, more flexible and more democratic while its innovations will allow the EU to become a major player in the globe.

Its critics, however, say the central issue of the EU's democratic deficit has not been sufficiently addressed, meaning citizens will continue to perceive the European Union as being an elites-driven project.

http://euobserver.com/9/29073?print=1

Os novos rostos institucionais da UE - comentário de Honor Mahony in EU Observer

European Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso emerges as a clear winner from all this.

He had been nervous about being elbowed off the EU stage by a strong European Council president and undermined in his own Commission by an authoritative foreign policy chief.

Now he has to fear neither incidence. Belgian leader Herman Van Rompuy is discreet and modest. Just what member states, wary of being outshone, wanted. He will take these qualities to the presidency job as well as “subordinating” his own opinions to those of the council. So the internal fixer and not the traffic stopper.

Catherine Ashton, who has done well as a trade commissioner, has no foreign policy experience and has never held elected office. Her candidacy emerged largely as a result of a deal to have a socialist take the foreign policy post and preferably a woman and a Briton. The huge new job, as well as her relative inexperience, will mean she will need a lengthy adjustment period to find her feet. This plays into Barroso’s hands – although his aides stress that the commission president “has always said this is an extremely capable lady.”

Incidentally, they also say that Barroso will be happy to leave consensus-making among member states to Van Rompuy as this will “liberate” him to do other, as yet unspecified, “tasks.”

Van Rompuy will start on 1 January in order to have a longer handover time in Belgium where he has held together the fractious Walloons and Flemings since last year.

Ashton is to take up her duties as high representative and become vice president of the commission on 1 December. A legal tangle could ensue if the parliament, which holds hearings on all commission members, were to actually try and move against her. “On that there is no precise legal answer because the High Representative side is not in the gift of the parliament,” noted an official.

Thursday’s agreement throws open a few other questions – such as what to do with Benita Ferrero-Waldner, currently the external relations commissioner. She will be “given another substantial assignment” said the official. A solution also has to be found for the trade portfolio, which Ashton will soon vacate.

Meanwhile, Barroso is expected to have assigned the commissioner portfolios by the beginning of December. Only four countries have not yet named their next commissioners – the Netherlands, Denmark, Greece and Malta.

The commission president’s most immediate hurdle is to see that his commissioners are thoroughly prepared for MEPs, who as far as I can make out, are desperate to shed some political blood.

http://blogs.euobserver.com/mahony/

À espera que o Tratado de Lisboa passe

Presidência do Conselho Europeu: Tratado de Lisboa abre a porta a um (ainda maior) domínio dos grandes países? in EU Observer

European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso has sided with smaller member states in trying to restrict the role of the proposed president of the European Council, a new post created by the Lisbon Treaty.

Addressing the European Parliament on Wednesday (7 October), Mr Barroso chastised MEPs for referring to the post as "president of Europe."

"I am sorry, there will not be a president of Europe. There will be, if we have Lisbon, the president of the European Council. It is important to understand that point because sometimes I think there are some ideas about certain derives institutionelles [institutional drifts]," he said.

Loosely defined in the treaty itself, talk about the nature of the president's role has become one of the main topics in Brussels in recent days, as national governments deliberate whether the post should go to a well-known personality from a big country or a more discreet politician.

The exact job description will be written by the first person holding the job, with ex British prime minister Tony Blair among the most-mentioned candidates for the post. It is widely agreed that a politician of Mr Blair's standing would take the post far beyond the largely administrative role foreseen in the treaty.

According to the treaty, which is still awaiting full ratification by all 27 member states, the president is supposed to chair the regular meetings of EU leaders - known as the European Council - and to drive forward their work.

Mr Barroso, who himself enjoys attending international summits on behalf of the EU, has a personal stake in the issue.

A powerful council president would upset the power balance in the EU and would likely see Mr Barroso relegated to a more much Brussels-based role.

The commission president has no formal powers in appointing the European Council president but he warned: "The European Commission will not accept the idea that the president of European Council is the president of Europe."

Mr Barroso's remarks came shortly after a leaked paper on the new Lisbon Treaty posts by Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg underlined the importance of maintaining the "institutional balance" of the union. The paper has been interpreted in some quarters as an anti-Blair move.

Poland has also prepared a document on the role of the president of the European Council. Earlier this week, Polish Europe minister Mikolaj Dowgielewicz indicated to EUobserver the limited role that Warsaw foresees for the new president.

"We have to recognise that the Polish minister of finance or agriculture will only take instructions from his prime minister. He will not take instructions from the president of the council," he said.

Some member states, such as France, have indicated they want to create a major player with the presidential job by appointing someone who can open doors in the US and China and who can give the EU some gravitas on the world stage.

Mr Blair's is not the only name that has been put forward in connection to the job. Other possible contenders mooted include Dutch leader Jan-Peter Balkenende; Luxembourg leader Jean-Claude Juncker and Felipe Gonzalez, a former Spanish prime minister.

http://euobserver.com/9/28799?print=1

‘Sim‘ na Irlanda ao Tratado de Lisboa: resultado de acordo com a única ‘escolha‘ aceitável... nos pequenos países

Referendo na Irlanda: ‘Não somos carneiros‘ (cartoon de Chapatte in Le Temps)

‘Apoio ao Tratado de Lisboa em queda na Irlanda‘ in EU Observer

With just a month to go until Ireland's second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, a poll has shown that 46 percent support a yes vote, down eight points since May.

Published by the Irish Times, the TNS mrbi poll shows a rise of one point in those saying they plan to vote No to 29 percent with the Don't Knows registering at 25 percent, up seven points in comparison to a pre-summer survey.

The newspaper notes that most of the people who have left the Yes side have entered the Don't Know category rather than crossed to the No camp.

The drop in support for the treaty is reminiscent of the trend in the weeks ahead of the first referendum which resulted in a No in June last year. It is set to spur the government to place more focus on a strong and coherent campaign.

However, prime minister Brian Cowen's Fianna Fail party, grappling with the devastating effects of the economic crisis, has reached an historic low in polls, garnering just 17 percent support in another poll by the Irish Times.

The survey indicates that 85 percent are dissatisfied with the government's performance while 11 percent approve it.

Dan Boyle, chairman of the Green Party, the junior governing party, said that it will be a "challenge" for the government to survive until January, with general elections only due in 2012.

For his part, Mr Cowen has met with the main opposition parties to work out how to make the most effective Yes campaign ahead of the 2 October poll.

He has also tried to persuade to voters to rise above their feelings for the government and concentrate on the issue at hand in the referendum.

"I don't believe this is about the future of this government or the future of personalities, it's about the future of the country. This is not politics as usual. It goes beyond any issues of party, organisation or locality. It is about our country's future," said the prime minister on Wednesday (2 September).

Economic crisis

However, Irish citizens have been shocked by the gravity of the economic crisis and the austerity measures proposed by the government to tackle it. In addition, much of the discussion in recent days has concerned the government's controversial plans to set up a 'bad bank', or National Asset Management Agency, to swallow toxic assets but the plan is viewed with scepticism by the public.

The Irish vote is hugely anticipated in Brussels, where there is widespread hope that the Lisbon Treaty will be passed and a backlog of decisions and discussions can then take place in light of the result.

Germany, the Czech Republic and Poland must also complete ratification of the Treaty, which introduces a powerful EU foreign policy chief, a president of the European Council and gives greater powers to the European Parliament.

http://euobserver.com/9/28616?print=1
JPTF 7/09/2009

A democracia na Europa: insistam, insistam até que os irlandeses digam sim...

Just over a year after Ireland's shock rejection of the Lisbon Treaty, Dublin has announced that a second referendum on the charter will take place on 2 October.

The move comes after the Irish government last month secured agreement from other member states on a package of guarantees on interpretation of the treaty in the areas of neutrality, tax sovereignty and social and ethical issues.

These areas had been identified as ones where there was confusion among Irish voters about the implications of the treaty.

Irish prime minister Brian Cowen made the date public in the Irish parliament on Wednesday (8 July.) He said the concerns of the Irish voters had been addressed by the legal guarantees.

"On that basis, I recommended to the government that we return to the people to seek their approval for Ireland to ratify the treaty and that referendum will take place on 2 October."

Ireland was the only country that put the treaty to referendum last year. A vociferous no-campaign suggested the treaty would see the EU set tax rates, legalise abortion and make the Irish army take part in EU peacekeeping operations.

The government was wrong-footed by the anti-treaty camp and the June vote saw 53.4 come out against the treaty, causing shock in Brussels and some grumbling about ungratefulness as the country has been a major beneficiary of EU funds.

Dublin indicated early on that it would put the treaty back to a vote but only after it was seen to be winning concessions first.

As part of the general Lisbon guarantees package, it also secured agreement that the number of commissioners would remain at one per member state even after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, which foresees a reduction in commission size.

The national backdrop has changed dramatically since last year with the country having been severely affected by the global economic downturn. Polls suggest, and analysts have widely predicted, that this will lead to a yes vote in October.

The government is also hoping to make the treaty - not known for being easy reading - more accessible to voters. It has set up a website explaining it and is sending postcards to all households outlining the legal guarantees on the treaty.

In addition, the referendum bill is designed to ease any voter fears that EU decision-making can be taken without national scrutiny by increasing parliamentary oversight.

All other countries have ratified the treaty in their parliaments. But Germany, the Czech Republic and Poland have yet to finish the ratification process which still needs the signatures of the countries' presidents.

http://euobserver.com/9/28429?print=1
JPTF 2009/07/09

Previsões para 2009: tentativa de salvamento do Tratado de Lisboa

Referendo ao Tratado de Lisboa: insistam, insistam até que os irlandeses digam ‘sim‘

A former senior MEP claimed last night that a rerun of the Lisbon Treaty vote was "a done deal" between Ireland and European Union leaders.

Danish veteran Jens Peter Bonde added that the deal means a new vote will contain declarations with lots of "nice words" that wouldn't actually change "one single paragraph" in the Lisbon Treaty text.

Mr Bonde, a noted Eurosceptic and an opponent of the Maastricht and Lisbon treaties, added: "I know that the French president has told European group leaders in the European Parliament, in confidentiality, that there is a deal now with the Irish government and the French presidency on the . . . rerun."

Mr Bonde's claims were rejected by Foreign Affairs Minister Micheal Martin, who insisted the Taoiseach was travelling to Brussels today to discuss "elements of a solution".

"No deal has been done," he said. "If a deal is done, it has to be arrived at by the 27 member states at the Council on Thursday and Friday. I can assure you that no deal has been arrived at."

With any future solution heavily reliant on Ireland being able to retain its permanent European Commissioner, Mr Martin said some states still preferred the proposed new system that allowed for a rotation of commissioners.

Conspiracy

But the minister said he was encouraged by President of the European Commission Jose Manuel Barroso's remark that he was "convinced" Irish voters' concerns could be met.

Meanwhile, an alliance of 'No' campaigners yesterday said the Government was "conspiring" behind voters' backs to rerun the treaty on the wider agenda of the economic crisis.

Pledging an "intensified effort" if there is a second referendum, Joe Higgins of the Socialist Party claimed there would be an attempt by the Government to "panic" people into voting 'Yes' to save their jobs and homes.

Patricia McKenna of the People's Movement said the Government was trying to make a link between EU membership, Lisbon and tackling the economic crisis. "The public aren't stupid and I don't believe they're going to buy into this argument," she added.

"There is now an attempt to go behind the backs of the people and to find another way to force this through, whether it be through a referendum or through some other procedure."

Sinn Fein's Aengus O Snodaigh claimed the Government was intent on getting people to "keep voting until you get the correct answer", while Roger Cole of the Peace and Neutrality Alliance (PANA) claimed a constitutional challenge was possible against the holding of a second referendum.

OBS: O texto transcrito foi publicado pelo jornal irlandês Independent (URL) sob o título 'Deal is already done' on Lisbon rerun, http://www.independent.ie/national-news/deal-is-already-done-on-lisbon-rerun-1570567.html

JPTF 15/12/2008

Em visitas de estado, pode-se apoiar o Tratado de Lisboa mas não ter dúvidas sobre este... in The Economist

The Czech president, whose country takes over the rotating EU presidency in January, has caused quite a stir on an official visit to Ireland. Vaclav Klaus, a critic of the Lisbon treaty that Irish voters rejected in June, was rebuked by the Irish foreign minister for "inappropriate intervention" after he criticised the treaty at a press conference organised by Libertas, a group actively involved in the "no" campaign. The Irish Times reports that Mr Klaus, who opposes greater EU integration, responded by calling the minister "a hypocrite".

For a treaty that has been declared dead multiple times already, Lisbon certainly seems to be kicking up an ongoing fuss. For opponents who keep talking about it, the real point seems to be the desire to make the EU more democratic and open.

Accusations and counter-accusations have been flying around Dublin. The foreign minister, Micheal Martin, is just one of several Irish politicians to blast Mr Klaus for inappropriate behaviour during his state visit. There are also charges that the government had excluded Irish journalists from a press briefing given by Mr Klaus (a spokesman blamed the Czechs).

At least some guests attending a dinner last night in honour of Mr Klaus said they were there to show annoyance at the Irish government's attempts to suppress his views. The dinner, hosted by the Libertas founder Declan Ganley, a rich and controversial businessman, drew a crowd of about 100, including what were described as "leading opponents of EU integration, anti-abortion campaigners and prominent figures in the Irish news media." They included Jens-Peter Bonde, a former Danish MEP; Anthony Coughlan of the National Platform; Hans-Peter Martin, an Austrian MEP; and Philippe de Villiers, a French MEP and former presidential candidate.

Meanwhile, talk of Libertas running candidates in next year's European parliamentary elections (reported earlier on this blog) were further fueled by a report that members of France's Mouvement pour la France, a eurosceptic party, have said they are prepared to represent Libertas. Mr de Villiers, the MPF leader, said he is among those willing to run "to enable this large pan-European movement to be present in France."

While the controversial Mr Klaus does not speak for the entire Czech government (indeed has been widely criticised in Prague over the visit to Dublin), his country is one of the few that has not accepted the Lisbon treaty. There is said to be growing concern at home over whether this will undermine its presidency of the EU.

Was it inappropriate for the Czech president to express his personal views on the Lisbon treaty during a state visit, especially given his country's upcoming leadership stint? And how might a series of Libertas candidates, if successful, change the face of European politics?

http://www.economist.com/blogs/certainideasofeurope/2008/11/dicey_diplomacy_in_dublin.cfm

JPTF 2008/11/14

‘Cerca de três quartos do irlandeses opõem-se a novo referendo‘ in EU Observer, 28 de Julho de 2008

Almost three quarters of Irish voters are opposed to the idea of a second vote on the EU's Lisbon treaty, according to a fresh poll.

The survey, revealed on Sunday (27 July), was commissioned by the London-based eurosceptic think-tank Open Europe, and carried out among 1,000 respondents between 21 and 23 July, shortly after a visit by French president Nicolas Sarkozy in Dublin.

The leader of France, which currently hold the EU's six-month rotating presidency, last week proposed to the Irish prime minister, Brian Cowen, that a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty be held on the same day as elections to the European Parliament next June.

But the new poll signals that there is currently not much appetite among Irish voters to be asked about the same document again: 71 percent of respondents said they were against the move, compared to 24 percent who were in favour.

The survey also suggested that in the case of a repeated referendum, even more people would vote No than the first time around: 62 percent of those polled now said they would reject the treaty while just 38 percent would vote Yes.

On 12 June, 53.4 percent of the Irish voted against the Treaty and 46.6 percent in favour, on a 53.1 percent turnout.

Of those who had given their blessings to the EU's reform treaty back then, 17 percent now said they would vote against it, while six percent of former opponents would now vote in favour of the document.

The negative sentiment has also significantly grown among the citizens who did not take part in the first referendum: 57 percent would vote No, while 26 percent would vote Yes.

Juncker backs EU-wide message to the Irish

Since taking on his role as a temporary EU president, French president Sarkozy has been suggesting he would press hard for a solution to the current stalemate over the Lisbon treaty by the end of this year.

On his visit last week to Dublin however, he admitted the solution may not be found during his country's EU presidency while also denying that Ireland must vote again.

Luxembourg's prime minister Jean Claude Juncker - who had previously faced a similar situation when French and Dutch voters rejected a European Constitution during his country's presidency in 2005 - has argued the Irish should vote again after they receive a new message of guarantees on national concerns.

"A unanimous decision from the European Council [representing 27 member states] promising not to interfere with the neutrality, abortion laws and taxation of Ireland" could "make the treaty comprehensible to the Irish," Mr Juncker said in an interview for Austrian paper Kurier, published on Saturday (26 July).

Meanwhile, the Irish government has initiated high-level contact with the two main opposition parties - Fine Gael and Labour - to discuss the formation of an all-party body on the Lisbon treaty, according to the Irish Times.

The new body would gather various opinions on how Dublin should proceed concerning the June referendum defeat, with the findings to be presented to other EU leaders at their top-level gatherings under the French helm in October and December.

Ratification map

Twenty out of 27 EU states have definitively ratified the EU treaty. Spain, Germany and Poland's parliaments have approved the text but the respective heads of state must still sign off on the document, with the German constitutional court still considering a legal challenge.

The Italian lower house is expected to back the text this week. Swedish MPs are set to pass the treaty without serious opposition when they begin their autumn session in September. And Czech deputies are planning to hold a vote in autumn, after the verdict of the country's constitutional court on a legal appeal.

The Lisbon treaty aims to reform the EU's decision-making and institutions as agreed in a basic package of changes already included in the European Constitution adopted in 2004.

JPTF 2008/07/08

‘Presidentes da Alemanha e da Polónia recusam assinatura do Tratado de Lisboa‘ in Der Spiegel, 1 de Julho de 2008

Attempts to reform the European Union's institutions, already in disarray following Ireland's rejection of the Lisbon Treaty last month, have suffered fresh blows in the last two days with the refusal of the presidents of Germany and Poland to complete the ratification of the treaty.

The presidents of Germany and Poland have said they won't sign the European Union reform treaty for the time being in a new setback following Ireland's rejection of the accord in a referendum last month.
German President Horst Köhler's office announced on Monday he would not sign the ratification documents until the Federal Constitutional Court, the country's highest court, rules on legal challenges to the treaty, which aims to streamline the bloc's institutions following the 2004 accession of central and eastern European countries.

Köhler's role is largely ceremonial but he still has the power to halt legislation. The court had asked him not to sign the treaty, approved by both houses of the German parliament earlier this year, pending its hearing of two challenges brought by the Left Party and by a politician from Bavaria's conservative Christian Social Union party. There is no date set for a ruling by the court, but it may not come until next year.

Polish President Lech Kaczynski followed suit on Tuesday by saying he will not sign the treaty either for the time being because of Ireland's rejection.

Kaczynski told Polish newspaper Dziennik that it was "pointless" to sign the treaty even though Poland's parliament had ratified it in April.

Asked by the newspaper if he would sign the treaty, Kaczynski said: "This is now pointless. But it is difficult to say how this whole thing will end."

The Lisbon Treaty is intended to ensure that the EU's institutions remain workable following the accession of 12 mainly Central and Eastern European countries to the bloc since 2004 which enlarged it to 27 member countries.

It has to be ratified by all member states but Ireland's rejection of it has thrown the reform plans into disarray. Irish voters rejected the treaty for reasons ranging from the fact the text is incomprehensible to concerns it would bring higher taxes or legalized abortion.

"The Bloc Will Go on Functioning"

Kaczynski likened the situation of the EU to that in 2005 when French and Dutch voters rejected a more ambitious EU constitution, which was later revamped into the Lisbon Treaty.

"The bloc functioned, functions and will go on functioning. It's not perfect but such a complicated structure cannot be perfect," he said.

The fresh setback comes as France takes over the rotating six-month presidency of the European Union from Slovenia on Tuesday with French President Nicholas Sarkozy pledging to restore public faith in the EU and get the treaty, which he helped to broker last year, back on track.

In a live televised interview on Monday, Sarkozy said he would address voters' concerns by pushing for tax breaks on products such as gasoline.

"Things are not going well. Things are not going well at all," Sarkozy told France 3 television. "Europe worries people and, worse than that, I find, little by little our fellow citizens are asking themselves if after all the national level isn't better equipped to protect them than the European level," he said, adding that was not the case.

"We have to think about how we can make this Europe a means to protect Europeans in their daily lives ... We must not be afraid of this word -- 'protection'," he said, adding that citizens wanted to be shielded from the risks of globalization.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,druck-563127,00.html
JPTF 2008/07/01

‘O êxtase fantasioso da Europa‘ por Ivan Krastev in OpenDemocracy, 26 de Junho de 2008

‘Que fazer com o Tratado de Lisboa? Enterrá-lo!‘ in The Economist, 19 de Junho de 2008

Voters have once again shot an arrow into the heart of a European Union treaty. This time it was the Irish, who voted no to the Lisbon treaty on June 12th by 53-47%, on a high turnout. They follow the French and Dutch, who rejected Lisbon's predecessor, the EU constitution, in 2005. In 2001 the Irish also turned down the Nice treaty, but the Danes started this game when they voted against the Maastricht treaty in 1992.

Europe's political leaders react to these unwelcome expressions of popular will in three depressingly familiar stages. First they declare portentously that the European club is in deep “crisis” and unable to function. Next, even though treaties have to be ratified by all members to take effect, they put the onus of finding a solution on the country that has said no. Last, they start to hint that the voters in question should think again, and threaten that a second rejection may force the recalcitrant country to leave the EU. The sole exception to this three-stage process was the Franco-Dutch no in 2005. Then, after two years of debate the politicians hit on the cynical wheeze of writing the constitution's main elements into the incomprehensible Lisbon treaty, with the deliberate aim of avoiding the need to consult Europe's voters directly again.

Now the Irish, the only people in the EU to be offered a referendum on Lisbon, have shot down even this wheeze. And as EU leaders gathered for a Brussels summit, after The Economist went to press, most had duly embarked on their usual three-stage reaction, all the while promising to “respect” the outcome of the Irish referendum—by which they mean to look for a way round it (see article). Some have had the gall to argue, with a straight face, that Lisbon must be brought into effect despite the Irish no because it will make the EU more democratic. This is Brussels's equivalent of a doctor saying that the operation was a success, but the patient died. In truth, it is the Lisbon treaty that should be allowed to die.

Democracy and efficiency don't always go together
Every part of EU leaders' three-stage response is wrong-headed. The Irish rejection of the treaty is a setback, certainly. But in the days after the vote, the Brussels machinery has acted normally, approving mergers, looking into state-aid cases, holding meetings and passing directives. The claim that an expanded EU of 27 countries cannot function without Lisbon is simply not true. Indeed, several academic studies have found that the enlarged EU has worked more efficiently than before. Besides, it is not always desirable to speed up decision-making: democracy usually operates by slowing it down. And many of the institutional reforms in the Lisbon treaty would not have taken effect until 2014 or 2017 in any case.

Nor is it right to treat the outcome as a problem for Ireland alone, still less to start talking of making the Irish vote again. As it happens, a case can be made that EU treaties are too complex to be readily susceptible to a simple yes/no vote. But 11 EU governments grandly promised such referendums on the constitution, and ten of them have been dishonest in pretending that Lisbon is a wholly different document. The Irish constitution requires a vote on any treaty that transfers any power at all to the European level. Even if one believes that referendums are not always desirable, it is both stupefyingly arrogant and anti-democratic to refuse to take no for an answer. Just what kind of democracy is being practised by the EU when the only outcome of a vote that is ever acceptable to Brussels is a yes (see article)?

A mess of pottage
It is not as if the Lisbon treaty is such a wonderful text. Besides being incomprehensible, it was—as so many EU treaties are—a messy compromise. And, like the constitution, it failed to meet the objectives laid down by an EU summit in Laeken almost seven years ago. The broad aims then were to clarify the EU's distribution of powers, with an eye to handing more of them back to national parliaments; and to simplify the rules so as to make the EU more transparent and bring it closer to its citizens. Nobody could pretend that Lisbon fulfils these goals.

This is not to say that everything in the treaty is bad. It would have improved the institutional machinery in Brussels, sorted out a muddle in foreign-policy making and brought in a fairer system of voting by EU members. But these are not the sorts of changes to set voters alight. And in truth, few EU governments or institutions are genuine enthusiasts for the treaty as such (Germany, which would gain voting weight, and the European Parliament, which would win extra powers, are two exceptions). Most simply wanted to get it out of the way and move on to issues more interesting than the institutional navel-gazing that has preoccupied the EU for too long.

After the Irish no, that is precisely what they should now do. The treaty should be buried so that the EU can focus on more urgent matters, such as energy, climate change, immigration, dealing with Russia and the EU's own expansion. It is disingenuous to claim, as some do, that without Lisbon no further enlargement is possible. Each applicant needs an accession treaty that can include the institutional changes, such as new voting weights or extra parliamentary seats.

Needless to say, many of Europe's leaders will instead look for ingenious ways to ignore or reverse the Irish decision. But to come up with a few declarations or protocols and ask the Irish to vote again would not just be contemptuous of democracy: the turnout and margin of defeat also suggest that it might fail. Nor can Ireland, legally or morally, be excluded from the EU. Attempts by diehards to forge a core group of countries that builds a United States of Europe would also founder because, outside Belgium and Luxembourg, there is no longer a serious appetite for a federal Europe.

Ireland is a small country, to be sure. But the EU is an inter-governmental organisation that needs a consensus to proceed. It is bogus to claim that 1m voters are thwarting the will of 495m Europeans by blocking this treaty. Referendums would have been lost in many other countries had their people been given a say. Voters have thrice said no to this mess of pottage. It is time their verdict was respected.
http://www.economist.com/opinion/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=11580732
JPTF 22/06/2008

‘Ameaça checa de não ratificação paira sobre o Tratado de Lisboa‘ in BBC, 20 de Junho de 2008

EU leaders have admitted that the Czech Republic may not be able to ratify the Lisbon Treaty, which has already been rejected by the Irish.

The declaration from their summit in Brussels notes that the Czech process is on hold due to legal difficulties.

But they said ratification would continue elsewhere, and ruled out renegotiation of the treaty.

But British PM Gordon Brown said the UK could not definitively ratify it until a court ruled on a legal challenge.

It followed a warning from a judge in the case that ratification should be delayed until the ruling was in.

The treaty passed through British parliament this week, but has still to complete formal ratification.

Mr Brown said the judge's intervention would not affect the process, which would not have been completed until after the court judgement anyway.

Bets off
The Brussels summit has been overshadowed by the Irish result, despite efforts to concentrate on food and fuel prices, and now the Czech threat hangs over the treaty.
"The idea is for the European Council to note that the Czech Republic cannot complete the ratification process until its constitutional court delivers its opinion," Reuters quoted an EU official as saying.

The Czech parliament's ratification has been suspended, after the Senate demanded that the constitutional court decide whether the treaty conformed with the constitution.

The Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek said at the summit that he was not going to try to halt the ratification process in his country.

But he added: "I am not going to force MPs to back Lisbon and I wouldn't bet 100 crowns (£3, $6) on a Czech Yes."

The Czech President, Vaclav Klaus, said after the Irish vote that it had killed off the treaty.

With growing opposition from Euro-sceptics, and key elections due in October, the future of the treaty in the Czech Republic looks uncertain, says the BBC's Oana Lungescu at the summit in Brussels.

'Not just for fun'
The issue has obstructed attempts to get a common position in Brussels - that ratification should continue, while the Irish government takes time to consider its next step.

But President Sarkozy said EU leaders had decided that: "The treaty ratification process should continue in all member states, that's the position now of the council."

"Ireland is a problem, but if we have a second or third problem then it's really going to get difficult," he added.

The treaty must be ratified by all 27 member states to take effect. Nineteen have approved it so far.

European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso urged respect for the Irish No vote but said he was confident all the countries would complete the ratification process.

He ruled out renegotiating the reform treaty.

"When a treaty is signed by 27 governments it's not just for fun," he said. "It's inconceivable that a government signs a treaty without the intention of ratifying it. It's a principle of international law."

Mr Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel said the European Union would not be able to expand further without ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, in what correspondents said appeared to be an attempt to lean on the Czechs.

On Thursday, the leaders agreed to scrap diplomatic sanctions against Cuba imposed in 2003.

Mr Barroso has also been pressing for the summit to focus on other issues such as fuel and food prices. After the first day of the summit, he announced:

-an emergency package for fisheries, amounting to 30,000 euros (£23,600) per vessel

-An extended programme to distribute food aid inside the EU to the most deprived people, increasing the aid from 300m euros (£236m) a year to 500m euros (£393m) a year

-A new EU fund to help the agricultural sector in developing countries.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7465448.stm
JPTF 2008/06/20

‘Checos resistem à pressão para ratificar o Tratado de Lisboa‘ in Reuters, 17 de Junho de 2008

The Czech Republic resisted pressure on Monday to quickly ratify the European Union's reform treaty after its defeat by Irish voters, and kept its options open on how to proceed with the charter.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who was to meet the prime ministers of four central European EU states in Prague, has led calls for the ratification process to continue around Europe despite Ireland's "No" vote.

But the pressure has hit a snag in the Czech Republic, one of nine EU countries which have not ratified the pact. Its eurosceptic President Vaclav Klaus and some others in his ruling Civic Democratic Party said the Irish vote meant the treaty was dead and should be abandoned.

Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek, a Civic Democrat who signed the treaty for the Czech Republic, said there could be no hurrying a decision on how to go forward but it was clear the treaty would not enter force on January 1 next year as planned.

"We are relatively cautious in statements on the matter and want to sit down at the European Council, find a short term solution and a path forward," he told reporters.

"I do not think anybody has a completely clear idea in respect of continuing the ratification process," he said, adding the Irish vote had to be respected the same way the French and Dutch referendums which killed a previous treaty in 2005.

The Civic Democrats have sent the treaty to the Constitutional Court, expected to rule on it around September.

"We have the advantage that we do not have to decide if the ratification process will be interrupted or not, because we have already interrupted it de facto," Topolanek said.

European foreign ministers were meeting in Brussels on Monday to start picking up pieces of the Irish vote, and the overwhelming opinion was that the ratification should continue.

The proposed new treaty would allow more EU decisions to be taken by a majority vote rather than consensus and provide the bloc with a long-term president and a foreign policy chief to give it more clout on the global scene.

Deputy Prime Minister Alexandr Vondra, also a Civic Democrat, told Monday's daily Hospodarske Noviny the French should not push others.

"This pressure seems inappropriate to me," he said.

He said the treaty may not be passable in the upper house of parliament, where the Irish rejection bolstered many Civic Democrats who have never been big supporters of the pact.

France and Germany have pressed other countries to go ahead with ratification to keep up momentum during the French presidency of the EU in the second half of this year. The Czechs will hold the rotating presidency for the first half of 2009.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKL161736120080616?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0&sp=true
JPTF 2008/06/17

O Tratado de Lisboa posto ‘fora de jogo‘ pela Irlanda in Geopolitics Central, 16 de Junho de 2008

A Irlanda que sabe dizer ‘Não‘ ao Tratado de Lisboa e às pressões da União Europeia