Sinn Feins list of "Demands"

marco_polo

Sinn Fein will today submit to the Irish government a detailed position paper outlining proposed changes to the Lisbon Treaty.

In addition Dublin MEP Mary Lou McDonald and Dáil leader Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin TD will be hosting a media briefing in Leinster House to take political correspondents through the proposal details.

Sinn Féin believes there is a responsibility on all of us who believe that a better deal is possible, to support and assist the government in their task. Sinn Féin wants to be constructive. We have sought a meeting with An Taoiseach to discuss with him the issues, which we believe can be addressed in a renegotiated Treaty.

Among these changes we wish to put forward are:
· The retention of a permanent Commissioner for all member states
· The retention of the Nice Treaty formulae for qualified majority
voting
· The removal of all 8 self-amending articles including the
simplified revision procedure in Article 48
· The removal of Article 46a giving the EU a single legal personality
· A strengthened protocol on the role of member state parliaments
· A significantly expanded protocol on the principles of subsidiarity
and proportionality including the aims and values of the EU
· Substantial amendments to aspects of the Common Foreign and
Security Policy
· Substantial amendments to the section of Common Defence and
Security Policy
· A new protocol on neutrality
· A strengthened social clause
· A substantially revised protocol on vital public services
· Amendments to articles dealing with public services and state aid
· The inclusion of the European Trade Union Confederation Social
Progress Clause to protect workers rights
· A protocol on Irish tax sovereignty
· Substantial amendments on Article 188 dealing with international
trade agreements including a cast iron veto on mixed World Trade
Organisation
agreements
· A new protocol ending Irelands participation in the European Atomic
Energy Community
· A series of amendments to Articles 10 and 188 promoting the needs of
the developing world in the context of international trade.

So just a few minor tweaks then?

PopeBuckfastXVI

marco_polo wrote: »

Sinn Fein will today submit to the Irish government a detailed position paper outlining proposed changes to the Lisbon Treaty.

In addition Dublin MEP Mary Lou McDonald and Dáil leader Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin TD will be hosting a media briefing in Leinster House to take political correspondents through the proposal details.

Sinn Féin believes there is a responsibility on all of us who believe that a better deal is possible, to support and assist the government in their task. Sinn Féin wants to be constructive. We have sought a meeting with An Taoiseach to discuss with him the issues, which we believe can be addressed in a renegotiated Treaty.

Among these changes we wish to put forward are:
· The retention of a permanent Commissioner for all member states
· The retention of the Nice Treaty formulae for qualified majority
voting
· The removal of all 8 self-amending articles including the
simplified revision procedure in Article 48
· The removal of Article 46a giving the EU a single legal personality
· A strengthened protocol on the role of member state parliaments
· A significantly expanded protocol on the principles of subsidiarity
and proportionality including the aims and values of the EU
· Substantial amendments to aspects of the Common Foreign and
Security Policy
· Substantial amendments to the section of Common Defence and
Security Policy
· A new protocol on neutrality
· A strengthened social clause
· A substantially revised protocol on vital public services
· Amendments to articles dealing with public services and state aid
· The inclusion of the European Trade Union Confederation Social
Progress Clause to protect workers rights
· A protocol on Irish tax sovereignty
· Substantial amendments on Article 188 dealing with international
trade agreements including a cast iron veto on mixed World Trade
Organisation
agreements
· A new protocol ending Irelands participation in the European Atomic
Energy Community
· A series of amendments to Articles 10 and 188 promoting the needs of
the developing world in the context of international trade.

So just a few minor tweaks then?

Sure that's all in legal mumbo jumbo, I can't be arsed to read all that... tell them to feck off

ShooterSF

Well everybody said that they would just disappear now and not suggest a list of changes leaving the government to deal with "the sky falling in". Here's their suggestions and you're still complaining? I don't remember people asking for a few minor tweaks either....

Denis Irwin

marco_polo wrote: »

Sinn Fein will today submit to the Irish government a detailed position paper outlining proposed changes to the Lisbon Treaty.

In addition Dublin MEP Mary Lou McDonald and Dáil leader Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin TD will be hosting a media briefing in Leinster House to take political correspondents through the proposal details.

Sinn Féin believes there is a responsibility on all of us who believe that a better deal is possible, to support and assist the government in their task. Sinn Féin wants to be constructive. We have sought a meeting with An Taoiseach to discuss with him the issues, which we believe can be addressed in a renegotiated Treaty.

Among these changes we wish to put forward are:
· The retention of a permanent Commissioner for all member states
· The retention of the Nice Treaty formulae for qualified majority
voting
· The removal of all 8 self-amending articles including the
simplified revision procedure in Article 48
· The removal of Article 46a giving the EU a single legal personality
· A strengthened protocol on the role of member state parliaments
· A significantly expanded protocol on the principles of subsidiarity
and proportionality including the aims and values of the EU
· Substantial amendments to aspects of the Common Foreign and
Security Policy
· Substantial amendments to the section of Common Defence and
Security Policy
· A new protocol on neutrality
· A strengthened social clause
· A substantially revised protocol on vital public services
· Amendments to articles dealing with public services and state aid
· The inclusion of the European Trade Union Confederation Social
Progress Clause to protect workers rights
· A protocol on Irish tax sovereignty
· Substantial amendments on Article 188 dealing with international
trade agreements including a cast iron veto on mixed World Trade
Organisation
agreements
· A new protocol ending Irelands participation in the European Atomic
Energy Community
· A series of amendments to Articles 10 and 188 promoting the needs of
the developing world in the context of international trade.

So just a few minor tweaks then?

And yet even if that did happen the Shinners would still probably say No. :rolleyes:

brianthebard

ShooterSF wrote: »

Well everybody said that they would just disappear now and not suggest a list of changes leaving the government to deal with "the sky falling in". Here's their suggestions and you're still complaining? I don't remember people asking for a few minor tweaks either....

yea agree at least they are doing something constructive.there are some fairly realistic suggestions,as well as some far fetched ones.Posted via Mobile Device

PopeBuckfastXVI

For the record I'm not set against a lot of them...

I'd like to see details on them though... tis where you'll find the divil...

Edit: By the way (detail depending) if SF get half of these and switch to a 'Yes' then they are actually the most genius party in the history of the world and will double their vote in the next GE. Of course they've been selling defeats as victories up north for years... hopefully it'll wash with us down south!

ionix5891

we do not negotiate with terrorists? :eek:

A new protocol ending Irelands participation in the European Atomic
Energy Community

why oh why? nuclear power along with wind would nicely wean us of turf, coal, gas and oil for electricity generation,
but no Nuclear is a dirty word in Ireland even tho majority of out population live quite close to UK nuclear facilities

but anyways thats a topic for another discussion

ShooterSF

There's a possibility some are unlikely but that's just tactical negotiation ask for 17 things, hope to really get 9 and look like you're making concessions at the negotiation table.

IRLConor

marco_polo wrote: »

· The retention of the Nice Treaty formulae for qualified majority voting

On this point I can confidently say that they're a bunch of fúckwits.

• If you do the maths, the Lisbon QMV rules are to our advantage.
• The nature of the calculation under the Nice rules left scope for renegotiating voting weights in accession treaties. Lisbon doesn't have explicit weights, so it's future proof.

sink

These changes are quiet ridiculous. They pretty much would gut the treaty of all it's substance and there is absolutely no way we would be able to get more than 1 or 2 opt-outs on some of the foreign policy stuff. It disingenuous for them to even suggest any of that is possible, just as it was disingenuous to tell the public there would be no consequences if we voted no.

layke

IRLConor wrote: »

Lisbon doesn't have explicit weights, so it's future proof.
[/LIST]

"Sure sir, just buy the extended warrenty it makes your appliance future proof". Used to love that one when I was in sales. Suckers.

IRLConor

layke wrote: »

"Sure sir, just buy the extended warrenty it makes your appliance future proof". Used to love that one when I was in sales. Suckers.

Well, more future proof.

Hitman Actual

Nice move by them, though. It helps deflect any flak they might be getting over the current difficulties with the No vote. And if the EU won't renegotiate, they can maintain their line that they don't listen to the people, they're undemocratic, etc. And of course they won't have to do any of the (hypothetical) renegotiations, so they can blame the government if it comes to nothing. It's still win/win for SF.

ShooterSF

Also leaves the opportunities to leave some ares of every treaty vague so the next one will have to be passed to set out those rules (that one'll prob have some new rules kept vague that will be clarified in the next treaty)

marco_polo

ShooterSF wrote: »

Also leaves the opportunities to leave some ares of every treaty vague so the next one will have to be passed to set out those rules (that one'll prob have some new rules kept vague that will be clarified in the next treaty)

With all due respect I though 'vagueness' was supposed to be one of the bad things about the treaty.

PopeBuckfastXVI

marco_polo wrote: »

With all due respect I though 'vagueness' was supposed to be one of the bad things about the treaty.

That all depends on just whose vagueness it is

SkepticOne

lenny_leonard wrote: »

And if the EU won't renegotiate, they can maintain their line that they don't listen to the people, they're undemocratic, etc.

To be fair I think that is being handed to them on a plate.

marco_polo

SkepticOne wrote: »

To be fair I think that is being handed to them on a plate.

There are a few German and French figures that ought to be ashamed of themselves this week. But they do not speak for the EU, and it is a pity that some of the more positive statements of support made by politicans of other countries have been largely ignored.

axer

marco_polo wrote: »

There are a few German and French figures that ought to be ashamed of themselves this week. But they do not speak for the EU,

Are they the same figures that get the extra power with QMV? They will be more representative (or will at least have more power) of the EU soon WHEN lisbon 2 passes - won't that be fun! I have no doubt that the Irish people will get the "right" result the next time to appease the minds of those German and French figures and we will be happy knowing that they are happy.

IRLConor

axer wrote: »

Are they the same figures that get the extra power with QMV?

No, they're the ones that lose more power than us with QMV. You're thinking of the Maltese.

ixtlan

It's interesting that Sinn Fein are reverting to the negotiating strategy that served them so well in Northern Ireland for over 30 years.

Here are my demands. Give us everything or we vote no again.

I think they need to look up the meaning of "negotiation". Usually for most normal politicians that means giving up something in return for something that you prefer. Making a choice.

What points are they offering to concede on?

Ix.

seamus

I actually find it ironic that Sinn Féin have engaged in the kind of thing that frustrated them for so long up the North. Ian Paisley would give a list of completely unreasonable demands, putting everything on hold for a long time, and then when SF actually gave in, Ian Paisley would say "No" anyway.

You think they'd have a bit of class and not stoop to that.

Sorry, I forgot we were talking about SF for a second.

As pointed out, most of this would remove the point of having the Lisbon Treaty at all. It's a nice idea - "Pretend that we actually support the treaty, just with a few tweaks", when they know full well that their proposed changes are essentially an outright rejection of the entire treaty.

axer

seamus wrote: »

As pointed out, most of this would remove the point of having the Lisbon Treaty at all.

and what is the point of having the lisbon treaty? Efficiency?

molloyjh

marco_polo wrote: »

The retention of a permanent Commissioner for all member states

This is not going to happen. One of the main purposes to Lisbon was to make the EU more efficient and one of the most obvious ways of doing that was to reduce the number of commissioners and BS portfolios. The commission cannot continue to function as is and will only get worse if/when new members join the union.

marco_polo wrote: »

The retention of the Nice Treaty formulae for qualified majority voting

This works against us in two ways. The Lisbon QMV gave the smaller nations more weight relative to their population than the bigger nations and had a formula that would not require changes if/when new members join, or if/when there are significant shifts in population in any member states (which will happen over time).

marco_polo wrote: »

The removal of all 8 self-amending articles including the simplified revision procedure in Article 48

I would not be in favour of the removal of all self-amending articles in the Treaty as it makes numerous things, including the addition of new member states, a far more complicated procedure than it needs to be. However I would like to see a change to the way in which some of it works. It is theoretically possible (in Lisbon) that if we voted No in a referendum to an amendment which changes our constitution that requires QMV, but the amendment itself was passed by the EU as a whole, our constitution could be changed even though we rejected it. Even though it is a highly unlikely scenario I would like to see some sort of clause that says if it requires a change to any members constitution it must be passed by that member state.

marco_polo wrote: »

The removal of Article 46a giving the EU a single legal personality

Why should the EU not be a seperate legal entity? I don't get what the issue is with this?

The rest seem a bit more wishy-washy and its not immediately clear exactly what they are after with each point.

molloyjh

axer wrote: »

and what is the point of having the lisbon treaty? Efficiency?

Pretty much.

axer

molloyjh wrote: »

Pretty much.

Then why heap a load of other crap in on top of that? like common defense and security.

marco_polo

axer wrote: »

Then why heap a load of other crap in on top of that? like common defense and security.

Probably because we are the only country that is quite so precious about the mere mention of it. Most of the other members of the eu want such measures.

axer

marco_polo wrote: »

Most of the other members of the eu want such measures.

Maybe most but not all.

molloyjh

axer wrote: »

Maybe most but not all.

This from someone who has been going on about democracy in the past. Axer come on, either it should be a democracy or not. We can't have it both ways.

biko

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Sure that's all in legal mumbo jumbo, I can't be arsed to read all that... tell them to feck off

Yet you had to quote it all, even though it was in the post above you

Excellent, I hope that the SF list can be a base to discuss how to better the treaty. Unless the usual quips become overburdening, see various posts above.

axer

molloyjh wrote: »

This from someone who has been going on about democracy in the past. Axer come on, either it should be a democracy or not. We can't have it both ways.

Yes maybe most governments have no problem with it but that does not mean that most people feel the same way.