| Brown is about to give away our independence as a country without even letting the issue get outside his tame MPs in parliament... |
Make your voice heard over the EU constitutional treaties: demand a referendum!
WORKERS, OCT 2007 ISSUE
SOVEREIGN BRITAIN... OR SOVEREIGN BRUSSELS? The proposed treaties would give the European Union a corporate existence overriding the sovereignties of its member states. EU chieftains now openly boast that they have a Constitution in the two treaties that replaced it. So cocksure are they that there will be no British referendum, they don't mind contradicting everything Brown's government claims. Does it matter? Of course it does! Brown is about to give away our independence as a country without even letting the issue get outside his tame MPs in parliament.
It's in-your-face triumphalism in Brussels. As German Chancellor Merkel said, "the substance of the constitution is preserved". She wrote, "A certain number of member States underlined the importance of avoiding the impression which might be given by the symbolism and the title 'Constitution' that the nature of the Union is undergoing a radical change." Former Italian Prime Minister Giuliano Amato said, "The good thing about not calling it a Constitution is that no one can ask for a referendum on it."
According to Giscard d'Estaing, the Constitution's author, "All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way." The new Trade Minister Digby, Lord Jones recently told the Economic Research Council, "This is a con to call this a treaty – it's not. It's exactly the same – it's a constitution."
Single legal personality
A single legal personality will give the EU a corporate existence overriding the sovereignties of its member states. This is to set up a new state legally. "The two Treaties constitute the Treaties on which the Union is founded and the Union replaces and succeeds the Community." This would transfer all legitimacy and all power to the EU. The EU, not national governments, would decide everything.
All areas of policy would come under EU control, actually or potentially, as in any other state. The Constitutional Treaty would allow any decision-making that is subject to veto in the Treaties to be changed to Qualified Majority Voting (QMV). The Constitutional Treaty would also allow any provisions of the Treaties to be rewritten as proposed by the European Commission and the European Parliament.
Romano Prodi said that giving the EU a legal personality would be 'a gigantic leap forward. Europe can now play its role on the world stage thanks to its legal personality." The French government says, "The European Union naturally has a vocation to be a permanent member of the Security Council, and the Constitution will allow it to be, by giving it legal personality."
Various British politicians have prevaricated on this important matter. Peter Hain said, "We can only accept a single legal personality for the Union if the special arrangements for CFSP [Common Foreign and Security Policy] and some aspects of JHA [Justice and Home Affairs] are protected." But they aren't. He also told MPs, "We could support a single legal personality for the EU but not if it jeopardises the national representations of member states in international bodies; not if it means a Euro-army; not if it means giving up our seat on the United Nations Security Council; and not if it means a Euro-FBI or a Euro police force." But that's what a single legal personality means!
Institutional changes
Instead of the present six-monthly presidency of the European Council, there would be a President, whose term of office would be two and a half years, renewable once, with extra powers, including control of the 3,500 civil servants in the Council Secretariat.
The new Foreign Minister (sorry, "EU High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy") would be a member of the European Commission. He would have the power to appoint EU envoys. He would chair the meetings of EU Foreign Ministers. As Prodi said, "as long as we have more or less a European Prime Minister and a European Foreign Minister then we can give them any title."
The Charter and the Court
The Government has already given away the independence of the judiciary. The new treaty simply confirms and strengthens the overriding rule of EU law. The article on fundamental rights will contain a cross reference to the Charter of Fundamental Rights, giving it legally binding value.
The Charter will extend the powers of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to challenge and overrule national laws. The ECJ's judges say that the Charter will change national laws. The Court's Advocate-General says, "It is difficult now to find a field of national law which is not affected in any way within Union law, and that will increase with the Constitution."
Frederick Reinfeldt, the Swedish Prime Minister, was at pains to point out that "the UK was given a clarification, not an opt-out." The Commission's lawyers agree that Britain has no opt-out from the Charter.
Foreign policy
Jack Straw told the House of Commons on 1 December 2003, "any move to QMV on foreign policy would be simply unacceptable". But in reality the government has accepted the introduction of majority voting in seven areas of foreign policy, most importantly on proposals made by the new Foreign Minister.
Blair got a 'declaration' asserting that national governments would keep control over foreign policy, but as a Foreign Office aide explained, "there is a massive difference between a declaration and a protocol. Everything else in the treaty is a protocol, but this is just a declaration. It is a worthless promise and not legally binding. Brussels will gradually expand its role in security, defence and foreign policy."
Justice and home affairs
The ECJ would for the first time get full jurisdiction over justice, home affairs and policing. The government said it would not accept the EU extending its jurisdiction on law and order, policing and the criminal justice process. But it has accepted all these things.
The Treaties would end vetoes over immigration, asylum, borders, visas and repatriation. The EU would get new powers to enforce 'mutual recognition' of legal judgements in civil and criminal cases, which "shall include the approximation of the laws and regulations of the member states." Again, the government said this was 'unacceptable', again, they accepted it.
The EU would get new powers to set mandatory minimum sentences. Europol would get increased powers, including the 'organisation and implementation of investigative and operational action'. Eurojust too would get new powers, including the 'initiation of criminal investigations'. The new treaties actually go further than the constitution in allowing the EU to introduce identity cards and even residence permits.
Powers
The Labour government has dramatically increased the pace of ceding powers to the EU: since 1997 it has given up vetoes in 133 different areas (24 at Nice, 46 at Amsterdam), plus so far 63 areas in the Treaty negotiations. Major's government gave up a mere 15, Thatcher 13.
Referendum Now!
Throughout 2004 and 2005 Blair promised a referendum on the Constitution. And on 13 May 2005, he said, "Even if the French voted No, we would have a referendum. This is a government promise." Just three weeks later, the French voted no and the Labour government broke that promise, Blair saying, "there is no point in having a referendum, because of the uncertainty it would produce." Blair timed his withdrawal from office precisely so that he could sign up to this Constitution without the name.
Brown is stubbornly continuing this anti-democratic policy. His much-touted 'Governance of Britain' document is just a smokescreen to cover his giving away Britain's sovereign independence. Brown's new 'constitutional settlement' promises to give 'more power to Parliament and the British people', yet he wants to deny us a referendum on a treaty which would take power away from Parliament and the British people.
Parliament might just as well meet at the golf course in future – everything important will be decided in Brussels. If we are angry at what they decide we can just catch the next Eurostar and join the Euroqueue to make our protest in Brussels.
What's to be done?
We have very little time to overturn the decision to sign these two treaties without a referendum. This would amount to a coup against the peoples of Europe.
It is a national emergency. The EU's leaders hope to agree that EU members' parliaments will all ratify the Treaty this December. There must be a broad campaign uniting everyone who is willing to demand a referendum, whatever their political affiliation.
The TUC has spoken for Britain by demanding a referendum on the Constitutional Treaty. Now all our unions must vigorously campaign and lobby for a referendum. Workplaces must take a stand and make their voices heard.
The treacherous Labour Party must be told that they will lose the next election – no one will vote for them unless they allow a referendum. We must unite with all those in the EU opposed to the treaties.