Polls in UK, Germany, Denmark, Sweden and Estonia show a clear No to the Euro
21st of July 2010
In at least five EU countries there is a majority against the Euro. In referendums you can’t vote “unsure” – only Yes or No count. Therefore below “unsure” has been taken out of results.
In June 2010 polls have been carried out in Denmark, Sweden, Germany and Estonia all showing a clear No.
In Denmark, Danmarks Statistik made the poll for Danske Bank, showing that 56 per cent would vote No if there where a referendum today.
In Sweden, Statistiska centralbyrån SCB made it, showing that 68 per cent would vote No.
In Germany it was Ipsos who made it, showing that 63 per cent would vote No.
In Estonia, TNS Emor made it, showing that 56 per cent would vote No.
In the United Kingdom, the latest poll is from April 2010, made by YouGov, showed that 76 would vote No.
Out of these five EU countries only Germany has the Euro today. The German government has no intention of calling a referendum on the Euro. The EU has said finally Yes to admitting Estonia to the eurozone from January 2011, and the Estonian government has no intention of having any referendum. In Denmark, it is still the official goal of the government to call a referendum with the view of securing a Yes. The governments of the United Kingdom and Sweden have chosen the opposite position, shelving all plans of a referendum on this issue.
French think euro exacerbates crisis
So far we do not have any polls on Yes or No to the Euro from other EU countries. If anyone knows about recent polls, please send us a link about it to ib (at) folkebevaegelsen.dk. However we have found an interesting poll from France made in June 2010 by TNS Sofres for Europa 1, itélé and Le Monde. It shows that 68 per cent of the French think that euro will exacerbate the consequences of the crisis (read more in Le Figaro)
Source: Folkebevaegelsen mod EU, Denmark
Dear members, observers and friends of TEAM,
at the TEAM Board meeting (on 3rd of March) Board members confirmed the proposal that TEAM AGM 2010 (Annual General Meeting) is to take place in Stockholm, Sweden, on 8th and 9th of May 2010.
You may start planning your train, bus, boat or plane tickets.
For further details please turn to: Eli van der Eynden from Nei til EU, Norway and Jan-Erik Gustavsson from Nej til EU, Sweden. Program proposals, ideas, wishes are to be sent to “firstname.lastname@example.org” or “email@example.com”.
Venue of the AGM will be: ABF-huset, Sveavägen 41, Stockholm.
Please use also Facebook event page.
7th May 2010
20.00_______________Unofficial get-together at Scandic Malmen Hotel (close to subway station Medborgarplatsen).
Draft programme TEAM public meeting
8th May 2010
11.30 - 12.30_______Press conference
12.00 - 12.30_______ Registration
12.30 –13.45________The euro and the EU financial and economic crisis
Speaker one, 25 minutes (Stefan de Vylder, Sweden)
Speaker two, 25 minutes (Hallgrimur Arnasson, Isafold, Iceland)
Discussion, 25 minutes
Swedish moderator (Hans Lindqvist to confirm)
13.45 – 14.15_______coffee and small talk
14.15 – 15.00_______The Lisbon Treaty
Speaker, 25 minutes (Patricia McKenna, People’s Movement Ireland)
Discussion, 20 minutes
Swedish moderator (Jan-Erik Gustafsson, Folkrörelsen Nej till EU)
15.00 -15.15________coffee talk
15.15 – 16.30_______Alternatives to the EU
Speaker one, 25 minutes (Lee Rotherham, UK)
Speaker two, 25 minutes (Tomas Larsson, Sweden)
Discussion, 25 minutes
Swedish moderator (Max Andersson MP)
16.30 – 16.40_______Conclusion of the day
18.30_______________Gathering, Kungsgatan 84
9th May 2010
11.00 to 15.00______TEAM AGM closed session at ABF-huset, Sveavägen 41
Show larger map
Stockholm Metro (T-bana) map (nearest stops to the venue: Rädmansgarten or Hötorget, both on the Green Line)
Details in English about using the Stockholm public transport, including the Metro, plus journey planner
Defend the Swedish model!
The Swedish Labour Court (Arbetsdomstolen or AD) announced on December 2nd its judgment in the so called Laval case (Case A 268/04). According to the AD judgment the two Swedish trade unions the Swedish Building Workers’s union (Byggnads) and the Swedish Electrical Workers Union (Elektrikerna) should pay 2.5 million SEK in damage compensation and costs of trial to the Latvian construction company Laval as a consequence of the conflict in Vaxholm autumn 2004.
First level AD judged that the conflict between Byggnads and Laval is legal and does not need to be interrupted. Five years later the same court decides that we now should pay a large compensation. Today’s judgment contradicts any common sense. It is unbelievable that the union should pay compensation, when we have applied the applicable Swedish law and the decision in the AD, says Hans Tilly, who is the president of Byggnads in a comment to the judgment.
At the same time AD has concluded that Laval company has not been able to verify that it had suffered any economic damage as a consequence of the conflict. Thus the trade unions do not need to pay compensation for economic loss.
The court was split. Four out of the seven members stand behind the judgment. In the minority was the vice president, who considers that the unions should pay nothing at all.
The AD judgment in the Laval case is very serious and will in its prolongation cause large impacts for Swedish employees. Now, when trade unions arbitrary may have to pay large compensations it will be very difficult to work for fair conditions for foreign construction workers, says Hans Tilly.
But what is even worse in the whole process, from the ECJ’s judgment to the government proposal of a Laval bill, is that the Laval case opens for wage dumping, Hans Tilly continues.
A few weeks ago the Minister of Labour Sven Otto Littorin presented a bill due to the ECJ’s rejection of the Swedish collective bargaining model, after that the AD had asked for guidance from the ECJ.
Among all things Littorin proposes that the right to take industrial actions will be greatly circumvented, and that foreign collective agreements or legislation should be applicable on the Swedish labour market if they fulfill pre-decided minimum requests concerning wage and other working conditions.
Every day we meet companies that stretch the working conditions and which in the collective agreement give one level of wage, but in practice pay a lower wage to the construction workers. A dumping of wages and conditions is ongoing on the labour market today. The risk is that companies which follow the rules will be set out of competition by companies that pay less attention to the working conditions and pays lower salary, says Hans Tilly.
It is self-evident that Byggnads and Elektrikerna should refuse to pay any compensation to the Laval company as they have not broken any Swedish legislation. Byggnads requested Laval to sign a Swedish collective agreement, and when the company refused Byggnads has put the workplace under blockade. Soon afterward Elektrikerna started a sympathy action. All this was fully in conformity with the so called Lex Britannia, which the parliament acted in 1991. When did it become a crime to apply valid Swedish legislation? Which are laws induces compensation to apply?
It is also self-evident that Byggnads and Elektrikerna and the whole Swedish trade union movement should refuse to subordinate themselves to the ECJ’s anti-trade union judgment in the Laval case and with all possible means fight against the anti-trade union legislation changes the Reinfeldt-led alliance government now (with ill-concealed delight) have put on the parliament table.
The EU has no right what so ever to meddle with the Swedish labour market model. In the referendum concerning the EU membership 15 years ago guarantees were given from the present minister of Foreign relations Carl Bildt, the social democrat leader at that time Ingvar Carlsson, leaders of the Swedish industry as well as from the LO (Swedish TUC) and TCO (Swedish “white-collar” TUC) that an eventual membership in the EU should not change what so ever the collective bargaining system or the trade unions right to take industrial actions. As citizens we were told that we had got these guarantees in the negotiation process.
This very day of the 2 December at 10.21 the LO president Wanja Lundby Wedin (also the acting president of ETUC) claimed in an e-mail from her fellow-worker Anders Larsson that “Sweden got guarantees before the membership in the EU that we should have our model untouched”.
When, if not at this moment, should the trade unions and the political leaders make use of these guarantees, and to inform concerned EU institutions which legislation and rules that are valid on the Swedish labour market. These legislation and rules are decided by the Swedish parliament and not by non-elected bureaucrats and perverters of the law in Brussels and Luxemburg. Defend the Swedish model.
Editor Critical eu-facts
(Translation Jan-Erik Gustafsson)
Now it stands at one-one. When will Ireland vote a third time?
“The people has spoken with a clear voice” declared the Irish prime minister Brian Cowen, when it was apparent that the yes-side had won the second round in the match between Ireland and the Lisbon Treaty. Last time in June 2008 after the Irish people spoke “with a clear voice” and rejected the treaty with 54.3 percent vote Brian Cowen asked his colleagues in the other 26 member states to give time to analyse why the people voted as they did.
Half a year later the Irish government had reached the conclusion that it was not (of course) the Lisbon Treaty per se people had rejected, but their “concerns” only dealt with the abortion issue, the tax and neutrality politics and that Ireland should lose “its” EU-commissioner.
At the European Council meeting last December the Heads of States agreed to use an emergency exist in the still not ratified treaty and promised that the Commission should be composed of one commissionaire per member country even after 2014. (But as nothing should be changed in the treaty this promise is only written in sand). In addition the Heads of States agreed to invent some form of “necessary legal guarantees” concerning the other “concerns” as these had been defined by the Irish government.
From January negotiations took place behind closed doors in Brussels. “It is difficult, the guarantees must be formulated in way that they will give security to the Irish but also convince the other member states that nothing will be changed in the treaty today or tomorrow”, declared the Swedish minister of European Affairs after consultation with the Consultation Board of the Swedish Parliament in June just before the Council meeting.
After some trouble initiated by Great Britain the Council meeting took a “decision” which implied that Ireland got “legal guarantees” concerning “taxation policy, the right to life, education and the family, and Ireland traditional policy of military neutrality”.
In essential these “legal guarantees” are nothing new. The intent was to “provide reassurance and respond to the concerns of the Irish people” as it was formulated in the decision. It was not a question to make any change in the Lisbon Treaty. “The legal guarantees are only valid for Ireland and will change nothing in the treaty per se” the current president of the EU Fredrik Reinfeldt told at a press conference in Brussels after the meeting.
The editorial of the Svenska Dagbladet (a conservative morning paper) wrote “EU cosmetic will win the Irish votes” when it was clear that the Irish should vote another time of “in principle the same thing”, and added “We guarantee that you will not be compelled to do what you anyway don’t need to do”.
Such empty words were enough for Brian Cowen to decide upon a second referendum. This time 67 percent voted as the Irish and European power elite requested. The yes win is indisputable (even if the methods used were dubious). Congratulations, Brian Cowen. Now it stands one-one in the match Ireland versus Lisbon Treaty.
Now we expect that the Irish government at the next European Council meeting in October once more will ask the governments in the 26 member states to get time to analyse why the Irish people voted as it did and that Brain Cowen soon will set up a parliamentarian committee with the task to single out to what the Irish voted yes. Can we be sure that the Irish voted yes to the treaty? And if so, why, as the Irish voted the exact same treaty as they earlier rejected?
The yes campaign before the second vote dealt with other problems than the Lisbon Treaty. None of the numerous posters the yes side political parties and their cover up organisations like “Ireland for Europe” and “Europe for Ireland” had posted in Dublin and around Ireland dealt with treaty. Instead the message was “Vote for jobs”, “Yes for the Economy”, “Vote for recovery” just to mention a few.
Under the headline “Thanks to the crisis” the editorial of Expressen (liberal evening paper) concludes: “If it had not been for the global financial situation and the serious economic situation the Irish may had kept its no”. Against this background it would be natural that the Irish government immediately makes a formal request to the next European Council to deliver “legal guarantees” to the Irish people so that the Lisbon Treaty will get rid of the unemployment and solve the economic crisis and then let the Irish people vote a third time.
Anything else would be a “democratic circus” (to borrow an appropriate editorial expression from the liberal morning paper Dagens Nyheter). We do not believe that it is only when the people vote against what the establishment requests that referendums are rerun.
Brian Cowen and Fredrik Reinfeldt: When will we see the third round in the match Ireland versus Lisbon Treaty?
Jan-Erik Gustafsson and Gösta Torstensson
People’s Movement No to the EU, Sweden
Swedish Presidency draws up plans for EU Foreign Minister “in secret”
Swedish daily Dagens Nyheter reports that the Swedish EU Presidency is planning, “in secret”, to fill the post of the EU ‘Foreign Minister’ if the Irish vote Yes to the Lisbon Treaty on 2 October.
The article notes, “no one speaks openly about the preparations while the outcome on Ireland is uncertain. But the timeframe is tight. Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt wants the [EU Foreign Minister] and a new ‘EU-President’ to be appointed at a Council meeting in Brussels on 29 October. At the same time, a decision will be taken on the format of the new EU Diplomatic Service. Sweden is therefore now working discreetly but intensely to draw up the plans for the [EU Foreign Minister]. In fact, it’s working on it so intensely that experienced observers express surprise over how much effort Sweden is putting into this.”
The article also notes that the Foreign Minister will have his or her own headquarters, where the Diplomatic Service will be built, while the Foreign Minister will also be in charge of “EU embassies” around the world. It’s also noted that important aspects of the EU’s aid and enlargement policies will fall under the scope of the EU Foreign Ministry, while it’s unclear to what extent it will have a mandate over the bloc’s trade policy.
tnx to OE
An article on Conservative Home reports that new EU Development Commissioner Karel de Gucht has said that: “Whilst the original Constitutional Treaty was technical, and correct, people didn’t read the Lisbon Treaty, they didn’t understand the first word about it. No real debate about the Lisbon Treaty could happen. This was a deliberate decision of the European Council”.
Meanwhile, former Green Party MEP and Chairwoman of the People’s Movement Patricia McKenna is considering a legal challenge against the Referendum Commission (The Independent), claiming an information booklet on the Lisbon Treaty from the body is “evasive”, “inaccurate” and “misleading” and must be changed or withdrawn immediately. The Irish Times quotes her saying, “This document which the voters believe to be balanced and non-partisan is one of the most disturbing aspects of the campaign to date”.
The Irish Times and The Independent report that John Burke, an Irish cattleman, has told the High Court that he intends to challenge the legality of the second referendum on the Treaty on the grounds that no means no and that no written evidence of legal changes to the Treaty had been put before the electorate. He told the Court, “That vote [the first referendum] still stands and the Taoiseach has since told the electorate they have been misinformed and that they will have to vote until such time as they decide to vote the opposite”.
Even the Swedish Young Social Democrats (pro-EU party) have come out against the Lisbon Treaty, thereby going against the line of their elders. In an article on Europaportalen, the Chairwoman of the Young Social Democrats, Jytte Guteland, argues that “While the Young Social Democrats have confirmed its basic positive view of [European] cooperation, we have decided to say No to the Lisbon Treaty. The criticism was fundamentally about a Treaty which in our eyes isn’t sufficiently democratic.” She argues that in future the EU must develop treaties with more focus on democracy, human rights and transparency.
tnx to via Open Europe
Henrik Brors: Sweden among losers as new EP emerges
Henrik Bors, writing in Swedish newspaper DN, says that Sweden, along with Denmark and Finland emerged as the greatest losers as the new European Parliament power structures became clear. Swedish MEPs were unable to land any of the more important chairmanships in the new parliament as they all went to larger countries.
Surprise, surprise… the big ‘uns - Italy, Germany, France, Great Britain and Poland took all the spoils.
addition (on July 28th)
The French Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs has hailed France’s presence on European Parliament committees, saying “With 4 committee and sub-committee chairs, France has only one chair less than Italy, is equal to Germany and is ahead of the UK and Spain.” He added that France “is one of the leading European countries in terms of the number of vice presidents.”
New EU law on seasonal workers could threaten wages, unions warn
Six Swedish Union Presidents argue today in an opinion piece in Svenska Dagbladet that a law drafted by the European Commission could lead to wage dumping. They note that the law, which concerns seasonal workers born outside of the EU, is unclear and should therefore be scrapped.
Currently citizens from outside the EU can work for up to three months without applying for a resident’s permit, provided that they fulfil the visa requirements. If the new European law is implemented, citizens from outside the EU would be allowed to work for a period of nine months per calendar year for a maximum period of four to five years.
The agricultural sector along with the tourism and construction sectors are likely to be the most affected, should the proposal become law.
The right of the trade unions to take strike/blockade actions against a foreign company, which occasionally have workers posted in Sweden should be constrained. This is one of the proposals in the Laval inquiry set up by the Swedish government. Last year in December the European Court of Justice in a judgment concluded that the Swedish Construction and Electrician trade unions were wrong, when they by a blockade in the town of Vaxholm in 2004 would enforce the Latvian construction company Laval to sign a Swedish collective agreement.
The government investigator, Cleas Stråht, also the director of the Labour Arbitration Institute, presented 12 December his proposal of legislation changes, which need to be addressed after the Laval judgement. The government had asked for a solution which fully respects the EU legislation, but at the same time would imply that the Swedish labour market model should be possible to apply on posted workers, who work occasionally in Sweden.
The Stråth proposal means that the trade unions chances to take strike/blockade actions against a foreign company posted in Sweden will be heavily constrained. The unions are only allowed to claim minimum wage and minimum conditions from foreign companies, and no other benefits negotiated in Swedish collective agreements. If the posted workers have any form of agreement from the country of origin, which are comparable with the conditions in Sweden, then a Swedish trade union has no right to enforce the foreign company to sign a Swedish collective agreement by using strike actions.
“The constraint of the right to take industrial actions is when the employees have provisions which are as good or better than the provisions which are approved in the country of origin”, says Claes Stråth.
International press release
After a 24-hour debate the members of the Swedish Parliament said yes to the Lisbon Treaty in the late evening of 20 November. 243 members voted yes to the Treaty, 39 voted against, 13 did not vote and 54 were not present. According to the Swedish constitutional legislation a vote of 1/6 of the members present could have blocked and postponed the ratification for a year, which means at least 49 votes. Thus if the 8 social democrats (among them two former ministers Morgan Johansson and Leif Pagrotsky and a newspaper editor Bo Bernardsson) and two of the five members from the government parties had voted with the Left Party and Green Party members, the ratification would have been postponed. The only real democrat from the establishment parties in the voting was Sven Bergström from the centrist party, who voted no together with the Left and Green members.
In fact the social democrat party had the power to stop the ratification. The Fredrik Reinfeld rightwing-government were dependent of the 130 social democrats votes in the Parliament to get the ratification through. After party banning in the final vote the “opposition” social democrat sadly put down their votes or were not present.
READ MORE !!
Massiv majoritet röstade ja till Lissabonfördraget
Motståndarna gjorde ett sista försök att skjuta på beslutet och låta väljarna folkomrösta.
Men sent på torsdagskvällen sade riksdagen ja till EU:s Lissabonfördrag.
Röstsiffrorna efter maratondebatten i riksdagen blev 243 ja, 39 nej och 13 nedlagda röster. Dessutom var 54 icke närvarande.
Today (Wednesday 19th) on the eve of the vote in the Swedish Parliament on the Treaty of Lisbon the Peoples Movement – Gluaiseacht an Phobail handed in a letter of protest to the Swedish Ambassador to Ireland Mr Claes Ljungdahl, to express our opposition to the Swedish Governments decision to proceed with ratification of a treaty already democratically rejected by the Irish people.
The decision of the Swedish government to proceed ahead with ratification is clearly designed, in consort with the EU Commission, to undemocratically isolate the Irish people and to bring more pressure to bear on us to accept this treaty.
Many people both in Ireland and across Europe admired and in deed would like to emulate the Swedish social model and the system of collective bargaining which is now under attack by the very policies of the EU that the Treaty of Lisbon wishes to see knitted into the very fabric and legal structures of the EU.
To coincide with the handing in of the letter of protest member of the Peoples Movement – Gluaiseacht an Phobail also held a picket on the Embassy to protest against the continuing ratification process but also in solidarity with the millions of Swedish citizens denied the opportunity to express their democratic verdict on this treaty in a referendum.
Frank Keoghan 087 230 8330
Cian Flanagan 087 750 8975
READ MORE !!
People’s Movement, an organisation that campaigned against the Lisbon Treaty plans to hold a vigil outside the Swedish embassy tomorrow – Wednesday - in protest against that country’s proposed parliamentary ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, despite its democratic rejection by the Irish electorate in June of this year. Representatives of People’s Movement will also hand in a letter of protest at the embassy.
Frank Keoghan, Secretary of People’s Movement said that: ‘This proposed ratification by the Swedish government is clearly designed, in consort with the EU Commission to undemocratically isolate the Irish people and to bring more pressure to bear on them to accept an unaltered Lisbon Treaty if there should be a re-run of the referendum‘.
‘The Swedish parliament should be aware’, he continued ‘that when Sweden negotiated EU membership terms in 1993 it was guaranteed that the EU accepted the Swedish model of collective bargaining and that this guarantee was a prerequisite for both Swedish membership and the acceptance of that membership by the trade unions and the electorate. Now, the ECJ has effectively annulled these provisions and yet it proceeds with the ratification process!’
‘The labour movement throughout the EU looked to Sweden for leadership in the face of this rowing back of workers rights, just as the Irish people looked to the Swedish government to support their democratic decision to reject the Lisbon Treaty. Sadly, Sweden is now standing on the brink of failure on both counts’ Keoghan concluded.
The demonstrators will carry placards in Swedish stating that ‘No means No’ and ‘Say No to the Lisbon Treaty – Respect Ireland’s No!’
The letter of protest will be handed in at: 12:50.
The vigil will commence at: 12:45 for half an hour.
Venue: Swedish Embassy, Iveagh Court, Harcourt Road, Dublin 2.
For further Information: 087-750 8975/087-230 8330
Den 20 november röstar riksdagen om Lissabonfördraget, som blir EU:s nya grundlag. Den kommer att gå före svenska lagar och till och med våra grundlagar.
from the daily european press summary by Open Europe:
Swedish PM Fredrik Reinfeldt has said that he expects that Sweden will be alone at the helm when it takes over the EU Presidency in July 2009. Sweden was originally meant to have shared the chair with an EU President, who in 2010 would take over on a permanent basis, marking the end to the 6-month rotating Presidency in the EU.
However, this will not happen if the Lisbon Treaty remains un-ratified by the Irish. According to Swedish Radio, Reinfeldt said it was important that Sweden pays close attention to “what kind of decision the Irish want to see and that we’re flexible about a solution, knowing that a transition [to a permanent President] could even happen during the Swedish Presidency.”
He added that Sweden would probably do a better job than a permanent President in negotiations over environmental policies. He said that a “significant Swedish influence” during the Presidency was important for the EU to make “progress” on climate change issues.
What kind of decision the Irish want to see? How about NO to Lisbon Treaty (REUC = Renamed EU Constitution)?
Mark November 20th on your calendar, Swedes will display the strength of their democracy in their Riksdag.
After an extraordinary meeting in the social democrat party group on 2nd of October in the Swedish parliament the party president Mona Sahlin expressed to the Swedish Radio 3 October “a prompt yes to the EU’s contested Lisbon Treaty”. She made the announcement after a group of more than 10 member of Parliament had declared that they intended to vote no to the Treaty, if not complete guarantees to safeguard the Swedish collective agreement system were available.
Among the critical parliamentarians were two former ministers Leif Pagrotsky and Morgan Johansson, but also Bo Bernhardsson, Peter Hultgren and Börje Vestlund. In addition the president of the Swedish Building and Construction Trade Union, Hans Tilly, today requested the social democrat party group to say NO to the Lisbon Treaty.
But Mona Sahlin is unconditional and unreasonable. She says that “we will vote yes to the Lisbon Treaty irrespective when the voting will take place in the Parliament”. Earlier the Minister of European Affairs Cecilia Malmström has officially declared that the parliament will vote yes on 20th November. But the government needs the votes from the social democrats. Sahlin adds that “the Treaty should not be kidnapped. It is better than the old one, and it will get a yes from us, the social democrats”.
According to the reporter the message from Sahlin must be very welcome by the government and the prime minister Fredrik Reinfeldt. For Reinfeldt a no to the Treaty would be very disastrous as Sweden will uphold the presidency of EU in the second half of 2009.
Mona Sahlin expresses herself contrary to her better judgment. A clear majority of the members of LO trade union are in favour of a referendum of the Lisbon Treaty and request that the Swedish collective agreement system should be guaranteed. In addition Sahlin statements mean that she overruns the decision of the LO trade union congress in June, claiming absolute guarantees to safeguard the national collective agreements before a ratification of the Treaty. This was also what all the EU establishment guaranteed before Sweden became a member in 1995.
The People’s Movement No to the EU urges the social democrat parliamentary party group to disrespect their party leader, and that all trade unions and true democrats directly protest against her undemocratic statements. Her e-mail address is: firstname.lastname@example.org
People’s Movement No to the EU in Sweden
This is the list of the remaining EU member-states who still haven’t ratified the renamed EU constitution and in this new series of articles we’ll report on activities within those countries that will eventually lead to a final NO towards the already limping “Lisbon Treaty”.
Regarding situation in Czech Republic perhaps it’s best if you read ERC2’s site.
Remaining Ireland and Sweden bring us following news:
Ireland - Lisbon will not pass in time for EU elections - MUST READ ARTICLE, including quotes like:
British MEP Andrew Duff asked Mr Martin if he would commit the Government to cleaning up the Irish laws on financing of referendum campaigns and the issue of equal broadcasting time for both sides in a campaign. “Several bizarre judgements of the Supreme Court have put charlatans upon the same basis of parliamentarians,” said Mr Duff, who also asked Mr Martin to clarify whether a second referendum was planned.
But for all those Swedish friends and Friends of Sweden who know that in good one month time Sweden will be in position to defend European democracy there is no time like present to be active, here is a press statement from Nej till EU.
from Sept 1st 2008, 1st letter
In a chronicle in the social democrat paper Aktuellt i politiken (on 23rd of July) the EU commissionaire Margot Wallström writes: “No matter why the Irish people voted No to the Lisbon Treaty the result must be respected. The Irish vote counts equal weight as the vote of any other member country”. If the commissionaire respects the existing EU treaties, it implies that the Lisbon Treaty – to 96 per cent the same as the EU Constitution the French and the Dutch peoples voted No to 2005 – has been rejected.
In ETC 34/08 the social democrat EU-parlamentarian Anna Hedh writes: “ …notwithstanding that the Parliament soon will take a decision on the Lisbon Treaty, there is no discussion and (we are) completely silent (…) The result of the Irish referendum should have implied that the Treaty had been rejected. In spite of this fact the ratification process continues in other member states – like Sweden – which is undemocratic and an insult of the Irish people”.
She further states: “The Lisbon Treaty means a massive transfer of power to the EU and its institutions. In central areas like criminal law the Swedish sovereignty is confined. The Union should get the character of a military alliance. The Swedish constitution is formally subordinated to EU legislation. In practice the EU gets a president and a foreign minister with vast authorities to govern the member states”.
We want to add that the authority and power of the Parliament will be drastically reduced to the advantage of the Council of Ministers, which will become an EU institution, and to the EU Parliament, which will get increased co-decision power in legislation. The big countries will be favoured in the Council of Ministers. For instance the voting strength of Germany will become 9.17-times bigger that of Sweden, compared to 2.9-times with the existing Nice Treaty.
The social democrat member of Parliament Bo Bernhardsson said at a trade union conference in Malmö 24th August: “…you do not need to be against the EU to be able to make demands upon the EU. Quite the contrary it is an obligation to show sense”. At the same conference the social democrats and the LO district in Scania and the Left Party demanded “binding exceptions to safeguard the collective bargaining agreement system before the Lisbon Treaty is signed”. To get binding exceptions the EU has to start a new governmental conference.
On the initiative of Byggettan (the Building and the Construction Union of the Stockholm region) and the LO district in the Stockholm County the trade union movement already carry on a name petition, which asks Swedish employees to sign up for the demands that Swedish collective agreements should be applied in Sweden and the right to take strike actions should be kept. In June the LO Congress unanimously requested that “a prerequisite for this /the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty/ is that the governmental investigation (i.e. the Strååth investigation) has presented its results before the Swedish Parliament ratifies the Lisbon Treaty”.
As well as the Göran Persson government did not respect the French and the Dutch peoples No votes, the Fredrik Reinfeldt government does not respect the Irish No vote. The minister of European Affairs, Cecilia Malmström, has officially announced that the Parliament will ratify the Lisbon Treaty on 20th November 2008 while the Reinfeldt government has announced that the Strååth investigation will present its results no sooner than on 15th of December 2008.
Member of Parliament of the Social Democrat Workers Party! We presuppose that You “show sense”. You are carrying the national sovereignty of Sweden and the employees right to Swedish collective agreements and the right to take strike action on your shoulders. The Reinfeldt government has already shown that it does not respect the Irish vote. You are 130 member of Parliament. It is enough with 88 NO votes from members of Parliament to reject the Lisbon Treaty, as ¾ majority is needed for a YES.
Firstly, the People’s Movement No to the EU requests that You require the Reinfeldt government to proclaim a referendum. The Swedish people has no less intellectual capacity the Irish people to be able to judge the Lisbon Treaty in a referendum.
If you do not get a consent to this self-evident democratic request we demand that You vote NO to the Lisbon Treaty on 20th of November. Anything else would be a betrayal of the Swedish people and of the trade union movement.
People’s Movement No to the EU
Here’s the 2nd letter, dated Sept 25th 2008, to the same 130 MPs (in Swedish).
Although that the outspoken Irish opponent of the Lisbon Treaty, businessman Ulick McEvaddy (chief executive of Omega Air) likened EU to a “Communist-Moscow-style” dictatorship he did add one important fact, namely that “the EU lacks the KGB, thankfully”.
Well if the EU still does not entail its own KGB/CIA than at least they are working on something resembling SPETSNAZ/FBI.
Following addition is rather old (two weeks) but it fits in this story and in our previous article perfectly: Secret EU security draft to pool policing and give US personal data.
In this article by The Guardian you will learn that there exists so called Future Group of interior and justice ministers from six EU member states - Germany, France, Sweden, Portugal, Slovenia and the Czech Republic.
Zey wil protect us.