• Facebook
  • Facebook
  • Facebook
  • Facebook

Search This Blog

Visit our new website.

Tuesday, June 17, 2008


Finally, its up and running. Downing Street have pulled their finger out and put up the petition we reqested on Friday.

We have started an email doing the rounds...


Last Friday the people of Ireland voted to reject the Lisbon Treaty.

But politicians across Europe are refusing to accept the result. They arrogantly insist that the Treaty must go ahead anyway. Despite the no vote, the UK Government is planning to carry on regardless, and ratify the Treaty in the House of Lords on Wednesday.

This is part of an attempt to isolate and bully the people of Ireland.

Please take 30 seconds to send a message to Gordon Brown by signing the petition on the Downing Street website.

Tell Gordon to respect the verdict of the Irish people - and drop the Treaty.


Many thanks


How politicians are refusing to listen to the no vote

French Europe Minister Jean-Pierre Jouyet says: “I don't think you can say the treaty of Lisbon is dead even if the ratification process will be delayed.”

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier says: “We are sticking with our goal for it to come into force. The ratification process must continue."

Spanish Europe Minister Lopez Garrido says: “The treaty will be applied, albeit a few months late.”

European Commission President Jose Barroso says: “The Treaty is not dead. The Treaty is alive, and we will try to work to find a solution.”

British Foreign Minister David Miliband says: “18 countries have now passed the reform treaty...each country must see the ratification process to a conclusion... there needs to be a British view as well as an Irish view.”

Don’t let the politicians get away with it.

Sign the petition now and send it to your friends.



Anonymous said...

UK Parliament is sovereign in UK. Irish referendum is neither here nor there. Since when was the UK ruled by Ireland?

Open Europe blog team said...

An odd argument.

Continuing the process of ratification in the UK can only reflect a presumption that the Irish will be talked out of their rejection – because otherwise, ratification is pointless. Surely the only way to truly “respect” the result of the referendum – as EU leaders keep saying they will – is not to have the Treaty at all? The whole point of continuing ratification is to put pressure on the Irish, so that EU leaders can tell Dublin ‘look, all other 26 member states support this’.

Unlike in 2005, when French and Dutch voters rejected the Constitution, the calculation this time seems to be that Ireland – as a small member state – can be subjected to isolation and coercion following its No vote. “This time the scenario is radically different. The idea is to completely isolate Ireland” said Belgian daily Le Soir in an editorial (14 June).

This strategy is summarised by FT columnist Wolfgang Munchau:

“The most important prerequisite of plan B is a 26-to-1 situation in terms of countries that have actually ratified the treaty. This outcome is far from assured and explains why Brussels, Berlin and Paris are so adamant that the ratification show must continue. So far 18 countries have ratified, with eight to go plus Ireland. Once 26 countries have ratified, EU countries accounting for more than 99 per cent of the EU’s population will have approved the Lisbon treaty. The pressure on Ireland would then become unbearable.”(FT, 15 June)

We think that this is unacceptable. Clearly, the UK *can* do whatever it wants.

We are talking about what we *should* do.

Anonymous said...

Given that a fair proportion of the No vote was motivated by concerns about tax rates, neutrality and abortion, the obvious next step is for the Irish to be offered some legally-binding assurances (in the form of explanatory addenda to the Treaty) that these are issues unaffected by the terms of the Treaty.

Then the concerns of the population can be shown to have been met and they can go for another vote if they like.

It's not about coercion or bullying. The Irish people expressed a view (based in large part on some rather dubious arguments made by the No campaign) and now is the time to reassure them that the issues they are concerned about are not in any way impacted by the Treaty.

An alternative strategy is for member states to fillet what can be salvaged from the Treaty (quite a lot, in my view) and implement this without the need for constitutional changes. The process of ratification through legislatures is a good way of making this happen and airing a national debate about the future of the EU.

It would be quite wrong to stifle this debate by abandoning ratification.