Brits parlement: Euro-verdrag is een Euro-grondwet

[Dr. Marc-Alexander Fluks]

REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl

Bron:  BBC
Datum: 8 oktober 2007
URL:   http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7034052.stm


EU treaty 'same as Constitution'
--------------------------------

The EU treaty is "substantially equivalent" to the EU Constitution thrown
out by Dutch and French voters in 2005, MPs have said.

The European scrutiny committee said it should be "made clear" the UK can
keep opt-outs of parts of the document.

The Conservatives said the government was now "morally bound" to hold a
referendum on the treaty, as had been promised on the constitution.

But ministers say the two documents are "substantially" different.

The treaty incorporates some of the old EU Constitution, on which Labour
had promised a referendum before it was scuppered by the Dutch and French
votes.

The Conservatives argue it is as much as 90% the same.


'Essentially secret'

But the government says it has secured opt-outs or "red lines" - in areas
such as human rights, tax and benefits, foreign policy and justice - which
makes it different.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown has said he will veto the treaty if these are
not kept.

The committee criticised the "essentially secret" drafting of the document,
which is due to be signed by EU heads of government in Portugal after an
Intergovernmental Committee (IGC) later this month.

It said the treaty had been drawn up hastily, with draft texts available
to member governments only 48 hours before the IGC in June.

This had been carried out "by the [EU] Presidency, with texts produced at
the last moment before pressing for an agreement", it said.

The report said: "The compressed timetable now proposed, having regard to
the sitting terms of national parliaments, could not have been better
designed to marginalise their role."

The report said it was "likely to be misleading" for the government to
claim that the treaty did not have the same characteristics as the
constitution.


'Obligations'

And it warned that the UK's "red lines" may not prove effective.

In addition, a requirement for national parliaments to contribute to "the
good functioning of the Union" may contradict the Bill of Rights, which
protects the UK's Parliament from being placed under legal obligations by
any outside body, the MPs said.

They added: "In our view, the imposition of such a legal duty on the
Parliament of this country is objectionable as a matter of principle and
must be resisted."

The report also said: "What matters is whether the new treaty produces an
effect which is substantially equivalent to the constitutional treaty.

"We consider that, for those countries which have not requested derogations
or opt-outs from the full range of agreements in the treaty, it does."

New provisions to allow national parliaments to object to measures proposed
by the unelected European Commission "add very little by way of democratic
control over the Commission and the EU institutions", the committee said.

Conservative Europe spokesman Mark Francois said: "It is now crystal clear
that the two documents are essentially the same and therefore Gordon Brown
is morally bound to offer the people of the country the referendum he
promised them."

Derek Scott, chairman of the I Want a Referendum campaign, said: "This
report blows a huge hole in the case against a referendum."


'Difficult' argument

Neil O'Brien, director of the Eurosceptic think-tank Open Europe, said:
"For a committee which is dominated by Labour MPs to come out and say that
this is substantially the same as the European Constitution is really very
striking."

He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme the "big turning point" was the
doubt cast by the committee on the government's claim that its "red-lines"
would protect the UK from the worst effects of the constitution.

"It is going to become very difficult for Gordon Brown to say this is a
completely different document."

But Europe Minister Jim Murphy said: "The reform treaty is significantly
different to the old constitutional treaty in intent, form and substance."

An alternative report tabled by Conservative committee member Bill Cash,
stating that the treaty "requires a referendum of the electorate of the
United Kingdom", was defeated.

--------
(c) 2007 BBC

**********
Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst (D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
Het on-line archief is te vinden op: http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
**********