Common Misconceptions About the Lisbon Treaty
Will the Lisbon Treaty Make the EU into a Superstate?
Is there a democratic deficit in the EU?
Is the Lisbon Treaty and the EU a Threat to Irish Neutrality?
Will the Lisbon Treaty Create a More Militarised EU?
Is the Lisbon Treaty a Threat to Businesses and Workers’ Rights?
Is the Lisbon Treaty a Threat to Public Services?
Is the Lisbon Treaty a Threat to the Irish Corporate Tax Regime?
Is the Lisbon Treaty a Threat to Christian Values?
--------------------------------------------
Will the Lisbon Treaty Make the EU into a Superstate?
The NO side have claimed that the Lisbon Treaty, by giving the EU its own legal personality, will create a new “superstate”. The EC has possessed legal personality since 1957 and that legal personality is simply a technical term that refers to the ability of an organization to the right to make and sign contracts, the right to sue and be sued, etc.
It is only because the national governments of the 27 EU countries wanted to put an end to the confusing distinction between the EC (established in 1957) and the EU (established in 1992), that it was decided that the EU should replace the EC and take over the functions of the EC.
The EU ultimately remains the creature of the Member States and the Lisbon Treaty does not this situation. The first article of the Treaty on European Union makes clear that the EU is an organisation on which the Member States confer competences to attain common objectives such as peace, security and economic prosperity. The EU?cannot act in areas that the member states have not conferred powers to it.
While one can hardly deny that the EU is a difficult organisation to comprehend, it simply makes no sense to argue that the EU is a superstate or that it will become one if we vote YES. The EU is and will remain the creature of the Member States who retain the ultimate political authority.
On pragmatic grounds, a brief look at the EU and US budgets clearly demonstrate the inexistence of an EU superstate. Whereas the US budget amounts to 20 per cent of US gross domestic product, the EU budget turns around 1 per cent of EU gross domestic product and is formally capped. The EU also has an obligation to adopt balanced budgets and it does not have the power to raise taxes.
Is there a democratic deficit in the EU?
The EU is the most democratic non-national organisation ever created and the Lisbon Treaty further improves its democratic credentials. There is no democratic deficit in the EU. On the contrary, the Lisbon Treaty makes clear that the functioning of the EU “shall be founded on representative democracy”.
It also expressly indicates that:
- Citizens are directly represented at EU level in the European Parliament.
- The Member States are represented in the European Council by their Heads of State or Government and in the Council by their governments, themselves democratically accountable either to their national Parliaments, or to their citizens.
- Every citizen shall have the right to participate in the democratic life of the EU.
It is true that the EU, being neither a state nor a nation, does not function like a typical national democracy. Its institutions are designed to protect national sovereignty as much as it is possible and this is why, in practice, the EU acts in an extremely consensual manner in the name of the peoples of Europe.
In other words, the EU is extremely protective of its smallest constituents. If any Member States have a right to complain about a lack of “democracy”, it is the biggest ones. As a rule, “small” Member States, including Ireland, benefit from an overwhelming overrepresentation at EU level. Without the EU, Ireland would have no real say in European and World affairs.
Is the Lisbon Treaty and the EU a Threat to Irish Neutrality?
The NO side have claimed during each referendum that our neutrality was threatened by the EU treaty under consideration. Even though the warnings expressed by the NO side have never came to pass at any stage of Ireland’s 36 years of EU membership, this fear continues to play a significant role in voter’s considerations when weighing up how to vote. The most recent example of this is the fact that 33% of people who voted NO believed the Lisbon Treaty provided for conscription into a European army.
Most critics, however, fail to realise or mention that our neutrality remains largely undefined and must be understood in historical context. Irish neutrality was enabled with the handing over by the UK of the Treaty ports in 1938. Ireland was then free to remain neutral during World War II, a war in which six million people were murdered in gas cambers.
It is accepted by many commentators that a neutral stance was the only option that could prevent unrest in Ireland during what was know in Ireland as the emergency. That neutrality however was a shallow neutrality. The Irish government provided as much clandestine help to the UK as an official policy of neutrality could afford.
An offer of NATO membership was turned down by Sean McBride, the then Foreign Minister, in 1949 in part because NATO membership meant recognising the existing boarders of all other NATO members and thereby accepting partition.
Since then Ireland has played a significant role in peacekeeping and conflict resolution missions with both the UN and the EU. Prior to the first Lisbon Treaty referendum Kofi Annan, former General Secretary of the UN, expressed his hope that Ireland, given our strong tradition of UN Peacekeeping, would say YES to the Lisbon Treaty to enable the vital peacekeeping and conflict resolution activity of the EU to be deepened and expanded.
A neutrality that refuses to take, and prepare, for its responsibilities to the weak and vulnerable is no neutrality at all. It is a turning away from those we could, and should, support. Neutrality is not pacifism. Neutrality is a refusal to align ourselves with a military block. It is a policy based on our Irish values. Irish neutrality is not, nor can it ever be, a rejection of our responsibilities towards those facing aggression.
With respect to the Lisbon Treaty, it is important to stress that it continues to require unanimity among EU countries for a European common defence policy to occur or any decision having military or defence implications. The Lisbon Treaty also clearly indicates that the EU must act in accordance with the principles of the UN Charter and with respect for the specific character of the security and defence policy of certain Member States.
Accordingly, it makes simply no (legal) sense to argue that the ratification of Lisbon will automatically lead to a European common defence or to the creation of a European army against Ireland’s will. It will still be up to the Irish people to decide whether or not to eventually amend or repeal Article 29.4.9° of the Irish Constitution, a provision inserted in 2002 in order to allow for ratification of the Nice Treaty and which states that Ireland “shall not adopt a decision taken by the European Council to establish a common defence”.
While it is true that the Lisbon Treaty contains a mutual defence clause, this clause contains an important caveat: It is clearly stated that this clause “shall not prejudice the specific character of the security and defence policy of certain Member States.” This means that Ireland will retain the right to take its own sovereign decision on whether and how to come to another Member State’s assistance in the event of military aggression.
Will the Lisbon Treaty Create a More Militarised EU?
A total pacifism is untenable Benedict XVI stated in his homily on the 60th anniversary of the D-Day landings in reference to the totalitarian aggression of Nazi Germany. It remains the case to-day as we saw most recently during the Balkan Civil War during the 1990s.
With no credible force to prevent aggression, those with guns terrorised those with less guns and those with no guns at all. If the perpetrators of aggression in the Balkan civil war thought that a credible outside force would intervene they would never have acted the way they did nor continued to do so for so long.
It would be to Ireland’s and the EU’s eternal shame if it did not respond to its failure to protect the weak and vulnerable during the Balkan Civil war with new robust mechanisms to ensure such failures never occur again. The Defence and Security provision of the Lisbon Treaty are a response to the EU’s failure during the Balkan Civil War.
Clearly Ireland and the EU need greater co-ordination of EU military capabilities, not to start aggressive unnecessary wars around the globe, but to enable Ireland and the EU to fulfil our responsibilities both to ourselves and to weak and vulnerable peoples and States facing aggression. Ultimately it is one of very many reasons why we need to find a positive solution to the current Lisbon Treaty impasse.
That being said, to fear the “militarisation” of the EU via the Lisbon Treaty is without foundation.
The NO side have made extravagant claims about the provision of the Treaty which provides that “Member States shall undertake progressively to improve their military capabilities”. What does this mean? It means that the countries commit themselves, not to spend more, but to adequately equip their national army in order to fulfill more effectively humanitarian and peacekeeping missions such as those in Chad and Kosovo.
The European Defence Agency, which was established in 2004 and has 26 members, including Ireland, and other neutral states such as Sweden, Austria and Finland, has a noble mission: It should support the Member States in their efforts to improve the EU’s defence capabilities in the field of crisis management (for example, humanitarian crises).
The same critics who object to the defence provisions of the Lisbon Treaty are more often than not the same ones who constantly complain about EU inaction in places such as Darfur. Would it be too much to ask them to show more consistency? If you want the EU to effectively act on the international plane, the Lisbon Treaty is a step in the right direction.
Is the Lisbon Treaty a Threat to Businesses and Workers’ Rights?
In a rather strange development, the Lisbon Treaty has been criticised by some business associations for granting too many rights to workers while some groups have denounced as a “neo-liberal” instrument to undermine worker’s rights.
The simple fact that the EU and the Lisbon Treaty are criticised by the far right as well as the far left is a good indication, on the one hand, that the EU offers a balanced institutional framework and that the Lisbon Treaty, on the other hand, is a good compromise reasonable people can agree with.
This can easily be shown by looking at the provision, as amended by the Lisbon Treaty, which details the objectives the EU must pursue in its policies. It provides in particular:
- The EU shall work for the sustainable development of Europe based on balanced economic growth and price stability, a highly competitive social market economy, aiming at full employment and social progress, and a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment.
- That it shall combat social exclusion and discrimination, and shall promote social justice and protection, equality between women and men, solidarity between generations and protection of the rights of the child.
- That it shall promote economic, social and territorial cohesion, and solidarity among Member States.
The Lisbon Treaty also contains a new social clause according to which the EU, when it defines and implements its policies and activities, “shall take into account requirements linked to the promotion of a high level of employment, the guarantee of adequate social protection, the fight against social exclusion, and a high level of education, training and protection of human health”.
Last but note least, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, which will become legally binding if we vote YES, refers to twelve “solidarity” rights:
- Workers’ right to information and consultation within the undertaking
- The right of collective bargaining and action
- The right of access to placement services
- Protection in the event of unjustified dismissal
- The right to fair and just working conditions
- The prohibition of child labour and the protection of young people at work
- The right to family and professional life
- Social security and social assistance
- Health care
- Access to services of general economic interest
- Environmental protection
- Consumer protection
The EU's rulebook reflects the belief that economic progress and social progress are two sides of the same coin.
Is the Lisbon Treaty a Threat to Public Services?
Some in the NO camp like to present the Lisbon Treaty as a threat to (undefined) Irish public services and claim that voting YES will lead to the privatisation of sectors such as health services and education. This claim is profoundly misguided.
Contrary to what the self-appointed defenders of public services have been arguing over and over, the Lisbon Treaty will strengthen the importance of public services (known as services of general interest in EU treaties) as one of the pillars and shared values of the European model of society.
Indeed, a new legally binding Protocol recognises:
- The essential role and the wide discretion of national, regional and local authorities in providing, commissioning and organising services of general economic interest as closely as possible to the needs of the users;
- The diversity between various services of general economic interest and the differences in the needs and preferences of users that may result from different geographical, social or cultural situations;
- A high level of quality, safety and affordability, equal treatment and the promotion of universal access and of user rights.
What’s more, if we vote YES, access to services of general economic interest, “as provided for in national laws and practices”, will become a new fundamental right. The objective is to promote the social and territorial cohesion of the EU. Finally, the Lisbon Treaty further clarifies that EU law cannot “affect in any way the competence of Member States to provide, commission and organise” non-commercial public services (e.g. education, social protection, etc.).
Is the Lisbon Treaty a Threat to the Irish Corporate Tax Regime?
Some have claimed that the Lisbon Treaty will undermine Ireland’s economic success story on the ground that it will give the EU to power to compel Ireland to raise its rate of profits tax (currently 12.5 per cent).
Concern over potential EU harmonisation is such that it led the Irish government, when the EU Constitution was being negotiated in 2002-03, to also oppose harmonisation in matters relating to tax fraud and tax evasion.
The opposition of successive Irish governments explains that the Lisbon Treaty leaves the current EU Treaty provisions on taxation unchanged. In other words, if we vote YES, unanimity voting will remain the general rule for all tax-related matters.
Is the Lisbon Treaty a Threat to Christian Values?
Some critics of the Lisbon Treaty have once again claimed that the “EU” was about to legalise abortion in Ireland. Nothing can be further from the truth. Indeed, the Lisbon Treaty maintains the current legal provision, first inserted into the EU Treaty in 1992, according to which “Nothing in the Treaties, or in the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, or in the Treaties or Acts modifying or supplementing those Treaties, shall affect the application in Ireland of Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution of Ireland”.
In other words, Irish law on abortion is protected from challenge under EU law. Furthermore, one should also realise that the EU has no power to legislate on this issue.
Another wild claim has been made. It has been said that if we say YES to the Lisbon Treaty, Ireland will have to recognise same-sex marriages. As always, the NO side fails to give the full picture or to understand EU law as it stands. The Lisbon Treaty will not give the EU the power to amend Irish marriage legislation and the definition of what marriage constitutes in Ireland will remain solely an Irish issue.
While it is true that a 2004 Directive provides that any EU citizen has the right to be accompanied by his/her spouse, it is for national law to define what constitutes a marriage. It is also true that the same Directive provides that any EU citizen has the right to be accompanied by his/her registered partner. Yet this is a right only to extent that the legislation of the host Member State treats registered partnership as equivalent to marriage.
To sum up, same-sex couples cannot become legally married here and same-sex couples from other EU countries do not have an automatic right to move to Ireland and work here.
Last but not least, the EU has been criticized for not making any explicit reference to God in its founding treaties. While the Irish government was in favour of such reference, no consensus could be reached and as a good compromise, the Lisbon Treaty includes a reference to the EU’s “cultural, religious and humanist inheritance of Europe, from which have developed the universal values of the inviolable and inalienable rights of the human person, freedom, democracy, equality and the rule of law”.
It is also important to note that the Lisbon Treaty explicitly states that the EU shall respect the status of churches and religious organisations under national law. It also includes the provision for open, transparent and regular dialogue with churches and religious organizations.
This last provision, in particular, provides the mechanism that, if implemented, would enable Europe to move well beyond just thinking about what it can do to exploring what Europe ought to do, what it should do. By asking what we should do the possibility of genuine progress within European society is opened up. A whole new dimension is then available to Europe through a process of exploring the right balance between man and society, between freedom and responsibility.
To conclude, the EU’s founding Christian ethos is strongly present in the Lisbon Treaty and we should remember that the founders of the European Project, Adenauer, Schumann, De Gasperi and De Gaulle, were driven by their shared Christian ethos. An important aspect that Catholic Christianity brought to this project was a perspective that maintained a universal viewpoint which always pulls the individual out beyond the borders of their nation in a way national churches cannot.