| |
| |
Opinion &
Analysis
|
Wednesday, February 27, 2008 |
The Lisbon Treaty is unintelligible and for that
reason alone should be rejected, writes
Tony Allwright
HAS ANY one actually read this 272-page tome, the
Treaty of Lisbon? It takes 12 hours. And because the contents are so
impenetrable, you will need to go through it several times. I doubt
whether any of the 54 ministerial dignitaries who signed it has read it
even once. For what minister can set aside 36 hours for study?
The progenitor of this oeuvre is France's former
president, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, whose committee drafted its doomed
forerunner, the Treaty Establishing A Constitution For Europe, or
TEACoFEe - a 'tea-coffee-or-whatever-you're-having-yourself' mishmash
designed to please and annoy everyone in equal measure, which was
thankfully rejected in the French and Dutch referendums.
Perhaps Jean-Claude Juncker, long the prime minster of
the Luxembourg Colossus, was right after all when he famously said, in
relation to those pesky referendums: "If it's a Yes, we will say 'on we
go', and if it's a No, we will say 'we continue'."
For the Lisbon Treaty is but a slightly modified
version of the TEACoFEe - still 90 per cent the same, according to
Bertie Ahern and others. A few provisions have been changed, largely
cosmetic things like removing the EU anthem, but the phraseology and
architecture have also deliberately been made much more difficult to
comprehend.
Astute as ever, D'Estaing proclaims that: "Public
opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we
dare not present to them directly ... All the earlier proposals will be
in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way ... What
was [ already] difficult to understand will become utterly
incomprehensible, but the substance has been retained."
Karel de Gucht, Belgium's foreign minister, helpfully
adds: "The aim of this treaty is to be unreadable ... The constitution
aimed to be clear, whereas this treaty had to be unclear... It is a
success."
It's certainly that. To achieve unreadability a very
simple technique has been used. At the beginning of the treaty, after
seven sheets of pompous signatures, it states "AMENDMENTS TO THE TREATY
ON EUROPEAN UNION AND TO THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITY", ie the treaties of Maastricht (1992) and Rome (1957).
Thereafter, each clause begins with phrases such as
"Article x [of these treaties] shall be amended as follows", with
instructions to delete, insert, modify and/or renumber Article x.
Consequently, you can't possibly understand the import of the amendment
without simultaneously studying the other two treaties.
Even the proposed
new 2˝-year "President of
the EU Council" doesn't get his/her own
clause, just an "insertion" of a new Article 9B
into those previous treaties.
Lisbon is thus an abomination that no serious
commercial business would ever contemplate
signing. If it represented an honest
endeavour, it would have incorporated the
contents of all three treaties into a single,
unambiguous, easy to comprehend document. |
|
“
|
Public opinion
will be led to
adopt,
without
knowing it,
the proposals
that we dare
not present to
them directly |
But that wouldn't have met
De Gucht's demanding standard of unreadability.
And, frankly, that's the single biggest reason to vote No. Would you
sign a contract for, say, employment or to buy a house, if you didn't
understand a word it said? Yet the threat of a No is of course precisely
why no one (but the Irish) is being permitted a referendum this time
around.
As a result, the constitutionally unavoidable Irish
referendum is going to become a huge battleground, where well-funded Yes
and No camps across the length and breadth of Europe are going to be
slugging it out - albeit covertly - within Ireland. For only Ireland can
stop Mr Juncker's relentless, unprincipled march.
The principal Yes arguments don't really stack up.
Apparently the treaty's main raison d'ętre is to make running the EU
smoother with the advent of the recently joined members (also the excuse
for Nice, incidentally).
But, as studies and publications, notably the
Economist, have pointed out, decision-making has actually become more,
not less, slick since the last dozen members joined, with new rules and
regulations being adopted 25 per cent faster.
People sometimes voice little details for voting Yes,
such as that Lisbon mentions "climate change". Well, yes, but only to
add "in particular combating climate change" to Article 174 about "deal[
ing] with regional or worldwide environmental problems". This hardly
embraces Al Gore's absurd climate changeology cult.
But the Yes camp's main argument is that Lisbon is
part of the mighty EU locomotive, which is always advancing towards some
mythical nirvana, and you either get on board or get left behind at the
station. Therefore, naysayers are voting against the train, want to
remain at the station and therefore abhor, almost treasonously, the very
existence of the EU.
This is nonsense.
The EU is not the plaything of eurocrats, MEPs,
commissioners and other Brussels bigwigs, though they often behave as if
it is. It is a club of the 490 million citizens of the 27 constituent
countries. So, if some of them are able under club rules to go against
the Brusselarians, the EU remains just as much the EU as it ever was.
Your golf club doesn't stop being your golf club just
because members vote down the committee.
Thus no thinking citizen could possibly vote to
support the execrable Lisbon Treaty. It is un-understandable and
unnecessary. Our major political parties support it because their
leaders don't want to be embarrassed among their peers in Brussels. But
that is no reason for anyone else to vote Yes.
Ireland has an historic opportunity and duty to save
the EU from itself.
Tony Allwright is an engineering and industrial
safety consultant, and a blogger on international and national issues.
www.tallrite.com/blog.htm
© 2008 The Irish Times
Published column as PDF |
Published columns as JPG |
|
Further details in a blog post
entitled
“Execrable Lisbon
“Reform” Treaty” |
DEBATE ON THE LISBON TREATY - 1st March 2008
A Chara, - Tony Allwright's call for a rejection of the
Lisbon treaty is disingenuous ("Don't sign an EU contract you can't even
understand", Opinion, February 28th).
First, he laments the unreadability of the new treaty.
That's how its sponsors wanted it, he suggests. According to Mr
Allwright, "if it represented an honest endeavour, it would have
incorporated the contents of all three treaties into a single,
unambiguous, easy-to-comprehend document".
He contradicts himself here, because elsewhere he
acknowledges that the first attempt to reform the EU came in the form of
a single, rather readable, self-contained constitution. That
constitution was rejected by the people of the Netherlands and France
for reasons that are not at all clearly linked to its content. At the
time issues such as unemployment and immigration weighed heavily on
voters' minds. There was nothing in the Constitution that could have
made unemployment worse or loosened immigration controls. Arguably, the
reverse is true.
Furthermore, there is a widely acknowledged flaw in
using a referendum to determine people's opinion on a multi-faceted,
technical proposal. It is that they may not answer the question they are
asked.
In part the French "non" was a response to the
question, "Do you approve of Jacques Chirac?"
We risk falling into the same trap. If the housing
downturn continues and Bertie Ahern's troubles take a further twist,
people may well answer the question: "Are you satisfied with the current
Government?"
Secondly, Mr Allwright took apart a straw man when he
pointed to the claims by the Yes camp that Lisbon would help deal with
climate change. I have followed the debate fairly closely and climate
change is never among the serious points made by those in favour of
Lisbon.
Nor does the Yes camp believe that the EU is
"advancing towards some mythical nirvana". No-one is under any illusion.
The treaty is a pragmatic attempt to forge a stronger, more effective
European Union in a world increasingly dominated by big players.
Many positive arguments for Lisbon have been made on
these pages and I will not repeat them here. But any discussion of the
treaty must be genuine and bear some relation to the facts. Colourful
but empty rhetoric cannot help the cause of democracy and it has no
place in the current debate. - Is mise ,
CIARÁN MAC AONGHUSA, Churchtown, Dublin 14. |
Return to Top of
Page |
Return to Index of Columns |
|
|
Gift Idea
Cuddly Teddy Bears
looking for a home
Click for details
“” |
Neda Agha Soltan;
shot dead in Teheran
by Basij militia |
Good to report that as at
14th September 2009
he is at least
alive.
FREED AT LAST,
ON 18th OCTOBER 2011,
GAUNT BUT OTHERWISE REASONABLY HEALTHY |
|
|
BLOGROLL
Adam Smith
Alt
Tag
Andrew
Sullivan
Atlantic Blog (defunct)
Back Seat
Drivers
Belfast
Gonzo
Black Line
Blog-Irish (defunct)
Broom of Anger
Charles Krauthammer
Cox and Forkum
Defiant
Irishwoman
Disillusioned Lefty
Douglas Murray
Freedom
Institute
Gavin's Blog
Guido Fawkes
Instapundit
Internet Commentator
Irish
Blogs
Irish Eagle
Irish
Elk
Jawa
Report
Kevin
Myers
Mark
Humphrys
Mark Steyn
Melanie
Phillips
Not
a Fish
Parnell's
Ireland
Rolfe's
Random Review
Samizdata
Sarah
Carey / GUBU
Sicilian
Notes
Slugger O'Toole
Thinking Man's Guide
Turbulence
Ahead
Victor Davis Hanson
Watching Israel
Wulfbeorn, Watching
Jihad
Terrorism
Awareness Project
Religion
Iona Institute
Skeptical Bible
Skeptical Quran
Leisure
Razzamatazz
Blog
Sawyer
the Lawyer
Tales from Warri
Twenty
Major
Graham's Sporting Wk
Blog Directory
Eatonweb
Discover the
World
My Columns in the
|
What I've recently
been reading
“The Lemon Tree”, by Sandy
Tol (2006),
is a delightful novel-style history of modern Israel and Palestine told
through the eyes of a thoughtful protagonist from either side, with a
household lemon tree as their unifying theme.
But it's not
entirely honest in its subtle pro-Palestinian bias, and therefore needs
to be read in conjunction with an antidote, such as
See
detailed review
+++++
This examines events which led to BP's 2010 Macondo blowout in
the Gulf of Mexico.
BP's ambitious CEO John Browne expanded it through adventurous
acquisitions, aggressive offshore exploration, and relentless
cost-reduction that trumped everything else, even safety and long-term
technical sustainability.
Thus mistakes accumulated, leading to terrifying and deadly accidents in
refineries, pipelines and offshore operations, and business disaster in
Russia.
The Macondo blowout was but an inevitable outcome of a BP culture that
had become poisonous and incompetent.
However the book is gravely compromised by a
litany of over 40 technical and stupid
errors that display the author's ignorance and
carelessness.
It would be better
to wait for the second (properly edited) edition before buying.
As for BP, only a
wholesale rebuilding of a new, professional, ethical culture will
prevent further such tragedies and the eventual destruction of a once
mighty corporation with a long and generally honourable history.
Note: I wrote
my own reports on Macondo
in
May,
June, and
July 2010
+++++
A horrific account
of:
|
how the death
penalty is administered and, er, executed in Singapore,
|
|
the corruption of
Singapore's legal system, and |
|
Singapore's
enthusiastic embrace of Burma's drug-fuelled military dictatorship |
More details on my
blog
here.
+++++
This is
nonagenarian Alistair Urquhart’s
incredible story of survival in the Far
East during World War II.
After recounting a
childhood of convention and simple pleasures in working-class Aberdeen,
Mr Urquhart is conscripted within days of Chamberlain declaring war on
Germany in 1939.
From then until the
Japanese are deservedly nuked into surrendering six years later, Mr
Urquhart’s tale is one of first discomfort but then following the fall
of Singapore of ever-increasing, unmitigated horror.
After a wretched
journey Eastward, he finds himself part of Singapore’s big but useless
garrison.
Taken prisoner when Singapore falls in
1941, he is, successively,
|
part of a death march to Thailand,
|
|
a slave labourer on the Siam/Burma
railway (one man died for every sleeper laid), |
|
regularly beaten and tortured,
|
|
racked by starvation, gaping ulcers
and disease including cholera, |
|
a slave labourer stevedoring at
Singapore’s docks, |
|
shipped to Japan in a stinking,
closed, airless hold with 900 other sick and dying men,
|
|
torpedoed by the Americans and left
drifting alone for five days before being picked up, |
|
a slave-labourer in Nagasaki until
blessed liberation thanks to the Americans’ “Fat Boy” atomic
bomb. |
Chronically ill,
distraught and traumatised on return to Aberdeen yet disdained by the
British Army, he slowly reconstructs a life. Only in his late 80s
is he able finally to recount his dreadful experiences in this
unputdownable book.
There are very few
first-person eye-witness accounts of the the horrors of Japanese
brutality during WW2. As such this book is an invaluable historical
document.
+++++
“Culture of Corruption:
Obama and His Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks, and Cronies”
This is a rattling good tale of the web
of corruption within which the American president and his cronies
operate. It's written by blogger Michele Malkin who, because she's both
a woman and half-Asian, is curiously immune to the charges of racism and
sexism this book would provoke if written by a typical Republican WASP.
With 75 page of notes to back up - in
best blogger tradition - every shocking and in most cases money-grubbing
allegation, she excoriates one Obama crony after another, starting with
the incumbent himself and his equally tricky wife.
Joe Biden, Rahm Emmanuel, Valerie Jarett,
Tim Geithner, Lawrence Summers, Steven Rattner, both Clintons, Chris
Dodd: they all star as crooks in this venomous but credible book.
ACORN, Mr Obama's favourite community
organising outfit, is also exposed for the crooked vote-rigging machine
it is.
+++++
This much trumpeted sequel to
Freakonomics is a bit of disappointment.
It is really just
a collation of amusing
little tales about surprising human (and occasionally animal) behaviour
and situations. For example:
|
Drunk walking kills more people per
kilometer than drunk driving. |
|
People aren't really altruistic -
they always expect a return of some sort for good deeds. |
|
Child seats are a waste of money as
they are no safer for children than adult seatbelts. |
|
Though doctors have known for
centuries they must wash their hands to avoid spreading infection,
they still often fail to do so. |
|
Monkeys can be taught to use washers
as cash to buy tit-bits - and even sex. |
The book has no real
message other than don't be surprised how humans sometimes behave and
try to look for simple rather than complex solutions.
And with a final
anecdote (monkeys, cash and sex), the book suddenly just stops dead in
its tracks. Weird.
++++++
A remarkable, coherent attempt by Financial Times economist Alan Beattie
to understand and explain world history through the prism of economics.
It's chapters are
organised around provocative questions such as
|
Why does asparagus come from Peru? |
|
Why are pandas so useless? |
|
Why are oil and diamonds more trouble
than they are worth? |
|
Why doesn't Africa grow cocaine? |
It's central thesis
is that economic development continues to be impeded in different
countries for different historical reasons, even when the original
rationale for those impediments no longer obtains. For instance:
|
Argentina protects its now largely
foreign landowners (eg George Soros) |
|
Russia its military-owned
businesses, such as counterfeit DVDs |
|
The US its cotton industry
comprising only 1% of GDP and 2% of its workforce |
The author writes
in a very chatty, light-hearted matter which makes the book easy to
digest.
However it would
benefit from a few charts to illustrate some of the many quantitative
points put forward, as well as sub-chaptering every few pages to provide
natural break-points for the reader.
+++++
This is a thrilling book of derring-do behind enemy lines in the jungles
of north-east Burma in 1942-44 during the Japanese occupation.
The author was
a member of Britain's V Force, a forerunner of the SAS. Its remit was to
harass Japanese lines of
command, patrol their occupied territory, carryout sabotage and provide
intelligence, with the overall objective of keeping the enemy out of
India.
Irwin
is admirably yet brutally frank, in his
descriptions of deathly battles with the Japs, his execution of a
prisoner, dodging falling bags of rice dropped by the RAF, or collapsing
in floods of tears through accumulated stress, fear and loneliness.
He also provides some fascinating insights into the mentality of
Japanese soldiery and why it failed against the flexibility and devolved
authority of the British.
The book amounts to
a very human and exhilarating tale.
Oh, and Irwin
describes the death in 1943 of his colleague my uncle, Major PF
Brennan.
+++++
Other books
here |
Click for an account of this momentous,
high-speed event
of March 2009 |
Click on the logo
to get a table with
the Rugby World Cup
scores, points and rankings.
After
48
crackling, compelling, captivating games, the new World Champions are,
deservedly,
SOUTH AFRICA
England get the Silver,
Argentina the Bronze. Fourth is host nation France.
No-one can argue with
the justice of the outcomes
Over the competition,
the average
points per game = 52,
tries per game = 6.2,
minutes per try =
13 |
Click on the logo
to get a table with
the final World Cup
scores, points, rankings and goal-statistics |
|
| |