The President of the EU Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso, has said in an interview on French radio that Britain is closer to the Euro and that the global credit crunch has sparked a debate about joining the euro among “people who matter in Britain”. The former Portuguese Prime Minister added, “I don’t mean to say that it will be tomorrow and I know that the majority in Britain are still opposed, but there is a period of consideration under way and the people who matter in Britain are currently thinking about it”. It has become blatantly obvious that not only have our own politicians ignored the people that voted for them and contribute to their wages, but we have had to watch while the people of Ireland have also been ignored and are expected to vote yet again on the Treaty of Lisbon and are probably be told to accept “Declarations” as an addition to the Treaty that will not be legally binding and the Treaty will be exactly the same that they rejected. If the Treaty is altered in any way at all, then all the other Countries will have to accept those alterations and ratify what will be a new Treaty. This Government went against the wishes of the vast majority of people in this Country when in haste they ratified the Treaty of Lisbon on 16th July 2008. because they knew without doubt that the people did not want Lisbon. They knew that if they had had the promised Referendum, and in their own sixth Report Chapter on it, it says “ and the Lisbon Treaty which it (the Government ) aims to implement, are of constitutional significance”. I thought we were told that if there was anything of “Constitutional significance” we would have a referendum! Remember also, the currency of the Union shall be the Euro? Do the people of Ireland not matter? They were the only Country in the whole of the European Union, that had a referendum, and it seems that the people’s will and voice will not matter and they will have to vote again and again until they “come up with the right answer”. I have news for this Government, people DO matter. Each person who sits in Government would not be there if they people had not voted for them, or contributed in some way to their wages and vast expenses. Just supposing the people get so angry (and short of cash) that they are fed up to the teeth of paying out to the EU and the extra it costs with all their legislation. Our MP’s are supposed to “be the voice of the people.” They speak (vote) or are supposed to speak, on behalf of the people. Well they haven’t done. The people are going to have to speak--and forcibly act-- for themselves and they will be able to do this under Clause /Article 61 of Magna Carta the great Charter of our freedoms. This they will do by demanding a referendum on the Treaty of Lisbon and I take this up from the words of William Hague, from The Times November 13 2007 “We would hold referendum even after EU treaty is ratified”. When asked if that meant a post-ratification referendum, he replied, “It means what it says it means, exactly what I said earlier”. From the Sixth Report in our Parliament Paragraph 15.” From the perspective of the UK constitution, some of the most potentially significant innovations relate to Title V, the "area of freedom, security and justice". This includes provisions on internal and external border controls, asylum and immigration, and prevention of crime, racism and xenophobia. In also encompasses judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters, police cooperation, and the operation of Europol (the European Police Office). We comment on the constitutional implications in Chapter 3. 18. Finally, a number of 'declarations' were made at the time of agreeing the Lisbon Treaty, some of which relate to matters of constitutional significance. A declaration, unlike a protocol, is not legally binding. It may, however, have political force and provided that it has been agreed by all Member States, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) may have regard to a declaration in interpreting Treaty provisions to which it relates, insofar as it does not conflict with those provisions. We should and must get rid of Declaration 17 without doubt. As far as Mr Hague’s referendum promise is concerned, can we believe him? Have we not had these kinds of promises from Labour? Whether we can or not, we cannot afford to wait that long, or until a Conservative Government ‘gets in’. The people must DEMAND a referendum to be held early in the New Year. A good time would be to be held the same day as the EU Parliamentary election in June. The people ARE going to have their say. According to the Vienna Convention on the Law on Treaties, providing that not all 27 Member States have ratified the Treaties we can withdraw the Treaty. An alternative to that may be the old and long standing “No Parliament shall Bind” might come in useful, or what we have been told for many years now, that all we have to do to become “Free” once more is to repeal the European Communities Act 1972 or as Lord Denning suggested, by “clearly and expressly state in a future Act that the latter is to override Community Law”. Quite a number of alternatives. However, I believe that should Lisbon become active, the EU would make certain that we would have nothing to “come out of”, as we would become very quickly like one big State, how can we come out to nothing, for the UK will be simply EU Regions? As a forward planner, it is what I would have already planned anyway. EU Legislation is already there---waiting. Not long ago, I sent out some thoughts on next year’s June EU Parliamentary elections inspired by Magna Carta. To recruit as many Pro-British MEP’s (alleged Eurosceptics) as possible-fill the place with ‘em. This too is part of using Article 61 of Magna Carta for it has lain dormant far too long. From http://grahnlaw.blogspot.com First of all, let's look at the full text of Article 18. A State is 'obliged to refrain from acts which would defeat the object and purpose of a treaty when' a) 'it has signed the treaty [or performed similar acts], until it shall have made its intention clear not to become a party to the treaty' or b) 'it has expressed its consent to be bound by the treaty, pending the entry into force of that Treaty...'. I have also placed other alternatives above which could come into play-UNLESS we have been told lies all these years! I understand that Her Majesty’s Secretaries are very busy with the amount of letters going to Her re this Treaty. Let the Palace be snowed under with letters, write the same letter also to Prince Charles and possibly the three alleged leaders. I say ‘alleged’ because it is the EU that leads, the MP’s WE vote for have to obey EU orders like the rest of us. For a little time and the price of 5 or 6 stamps, if we all play our part, we could make a difference. I dare not think of the alternative. Through these actions it should give the people of Ireland a boost, and hopefully we will become two nation States that have rejected the Treaty. The previous Constitutional Treaty fell because THE PEOPLE of two nation states said “NO” to it. And so it shall be the second time. xxxxxxxxxxx ap 1.12.2008. http://eulawblogger.blogspot.com/2007/06/is-there-obligation-to-ratify.html EU (Amendment) Bill and the Lisbon Treaty: Implications for the UK Constitution http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldconst/84/8403.htm The whole http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldconst/84/8402.htm Constitutional Committee Reports http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld/ldconst.htm How to precede after the Irish “no” 2 pages worth reading http://www.clingendael.nl/publications/2008/20080709_clingendael_commentary_005.pdf 
And, 'A question that sometimes...arises is whether a state which has consented to be bound may nonetheless withdraw its consent before the treaty enters into force.....in principle, there would seem to be no reason why it cannot be done given certain circumstances.' In fact, 'No delegate [at the Vienna Conference] challenged the assertion' that there was a 'sovereign right of a State to withdraw from the treaty at any time before it finally became binding'. Moreover, this is supported by the text of Article 68 of the Convention, and accepted by the International Law Commission and by the UN Secretary-General. The Article 18 obligation is substantive, not procedural.
In light of this analysis, it is clear to me that:
a) the UK is not legally bound to present the Constitutional Treaty for ratification to its parliament, or to hold a referendum upon it;
b) the UK can legally indicate at any time that it will not proceed with ratification of the Constitutional Treaty;
c) even if it had ratified the Constitutional Treaty, the UK could legally withdraw its ratification any time before that Treaty entered into force. End of Quotes from http://grahnlaw.blogspot.com
Tuesday, 2 December 2008
Posts
