Retention of Irish Commissioner

Scofflaw

There seems to be a good deal of confusion about the retention of the Irish Commissioner. The proposed European Council Decision to retain a full Commission can only be reversed by unanimity.

This is not "due to change in 2014" - that was part of Lisbon that has been/will be superseded by the Decision.

cordially,
Scofflaw

oscarBravo

Can you clarify something else for me, Scofflaw? I've heard it said that, should we reject Lisbon, the reduction in the size of the commission under the Nice rules will happen in 2014 - but I thought it was due to happen this year under Nice?

ShooterSF

This reversed by unanimity thing, would Ireland need a referendum for it?

Scofflaw

oscarBravo wrote: »

Can you clarify something else for me, Scofflaw? I've heard it said that, should we reject Lisbon, the reduction in the size of the commission under the Nice rules will happen in 2014 - but I thought it was due to happen this year under Nice?

Yes, under Nice, the Protocol on Enlargement dictates the size of the Commission, and that kicked in when the 27th member joined:

Protocol on Enlargement, Nice wrote:

2. When the Union consists of 27 Member States, Article 213(1) of the Treaty establishing the European Community and Article 126(1) of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community shall be replaced by the following:
"1. The Members of the Commission shall be chosen on the grounds of their general competence and their independence shall be beyond doubt.
The number of Members of the Commission shall be less than the number of Member States. The Members of the Commission shall be chosen according to a rotation system based on the principle of equality, the implementing arrangements for which shall be adopted by the Council, acting unanimously. The number of Members of the Commission shall be set by the Council, acting unanimously."
This amendment shall apply as from the date on which the first Commission following the date of accession of the 27th Member State of the Union takes up its duties.

That's the next Commission (the one being chosen this November) - under Nice, it has to be reduced to a number not yet decided, but which must be less than one Commissioner per member state.

Under Lisbon, the next Commission would be a full Commission, and the Commission would originally have been reduced in 2014:

Article 17 TEU, Lisbon wrote:

4. The Commission appointed between the date of entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon and 31 October 2014, shall consist of one national of each Member State, including its President and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy who shall be one of its Vice-Presidents.

5. As from 1 November 2014, the Commission shall consist of a number of members, including its President and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, corresponding to two thirds of the number of Member States, unless the European Council, acting unanimously, decides to alter this number. The members of the Commission shall be chosen from among the nationals of the Member States on the basis of a system of strictly equal rotation between the Member States, reflecting the demographic and geographical range of all the Member States. This system shall be established unanimously by the European Council in accordance with Article 244 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

However, the Guarantee offered to Ireland is that the Commission size to be chosen in 2014 will also be a full Commission by virtue of a European Council Decision.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Sam Vimes

ShooterSF wrote: »

This reversed by unanimity thing, would Ireland need a referendum for it?

I can't answer your question but even if it didn't I doubt the Taoiseach at the time would vote to get rid of the commissioner after Ireland specifically getting it changed to address the fears of about 30% of no voters. T'would be a very stupid move.

ShooterSF

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I can't answer your question but even if it didn't I doubt the Taoiseach at the time would vote to get rid of the commissioner after Ireland specifically getting it changed to address the fears of about 30% of no voters. T'would be a very stupid move.

We are discussing the same Taoiseach here right? I agree it would be a dangerous move (even if it was the right one) but who's going to call him on it? Who could benefit? FG, Labour and the Greens supported streamlining it too. Anyway ignoring the speculation, If it was reversible without referendum people should be told and allowed to make up their own minds on if they trust our govt. not to reverse it.

Scofflaw

ShooterSF wrote: »

This reversed by unanimity thing, would Ireland need a referendum for it?

I wouldn't imagine so, although presumably it would require an Oireachtas vote. I don't think there's anything stopping you pointing out that the Irish government could decide at some future point to give up the Irish Commissioner. After all, nobody needs to be popular, particularly not politicians.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Sam Vimes

ShooterSF wrote: »

We are discussing the same Taoiseach here right? I agree it would be a dangerous move (even if it was the right one) but who's going to call him on it? Who could benefit? FG, Labour and the Greens supported streamlining it too. Anyway ignoring the speculation, If it was reversible without referendum people should be told and allowed to make up their own minds on if they trust our govt. not to reverse it.

If that's the case we should just pull out of the EU if we don't trust our government to represent our interests, not to mention tear down Leinster house. We can't have a referendum every day of the week.

edit: since this will be happening in 2014, I fooking hope we won't be talking about the same Taoiseach

ShooterSF

Sam Vimes wrote: »

If that's the case we should just pull out of the EU if we don't trust our government to represent our interests, not to mention tear down Leinster house. We can't have a referendum every day of the week.

edit: since this will be happening in 2014, I fooking hope we won't be talking about the same Taoiseach

Ah here, hold your horses. If someone (like most people are unfortunately) supported and trusted one of the big parties FF/FG then I would see no problem for them but if you voted no based on the commission issue last time and support smaller parties and deeply distrust the big parties then this may be something that you would want to know before voting this time.

Also I agree with your edit though my hopes aren't too high.

Sam Vimes

ShooterSF wrote: »

Ah here, hold your horses. If someone (like most people are unfortunately) supported and trusted one of the big parties FF/FG then I would see no problem for them but if you voted no based on the commission issue last time and support smaller parties and deeply distrust the big parties then this may be something that you would want to know before voting this time.

But if you don't trust them to represent our wishes on the commission issue, something that we have been unequivocally clear about, how can you trust them to represent us in anything?

Scofflaw

ShooterSF wrote: »

Ah here, hold your horses. If someone (like most people are unfortunately) supported and trusted one of the big parties FF/FG then I would see no problem for them but if you voted no based on the commission issue last time and support smaller parties and deeply distrust the big parties then this may be something that you would want to know before voting this time.

Also I agree with your edit though my hopes aren't too high.

I see no problem with that. Everyone should vote on what is actually the case.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Sam Vimes

Also, ShooterSF, as you probably know because it's the topic of the thread, the size of the commission is to be reduced in 2014 unless we vote yes. You significantly increase your chances of having a commissioner if you vote yes

meglome

Thanks for that Scofflaw. It's great to get a truthful analysis of the situation.

oscarBravo

Sam Vimes wrote: »

...the size of the commission is to be reduced in 2014 unless we vote yes.

Actually, it's to be reduced in two months' time. See my question to Scofflaw and his reply above.

Euro_Kraut

Am I the only one who doesn't care if the Commission has an Irish person on it or not? Does Charlie McCreevy really represent my views?

Its quite likely that some like Margrot Wallstrom is much closer to my views on most issues. I personally feel the Commission should reflect the voting powers in the European Parliament. e.g. the conservative get 50% of the vote they get 13/14 commissioners.

It would make the EU Commission more representative of the people of Europe rather than of the Governments of Europe.

Anyway, its just a thought and has nothing really to do with Lisbon. Just find the pre occupation with Nationalities of the Commission members frustrating.