I have to say, this really is an insane Treaty created by madmen. I went through the government “your guide” pamphlet that was given to me by the landlord today. As already said, the Treaty is a complete eradication of all sovereignty and the capitulation to E.U demands.
First of all, the main jist of this Treaty seems to be that nations that run high deficits are incapable of governing themselves and so to save them and the Euro, the Treaty must be passed. Article 1(1) is straight to the point that the Fiscal Compact is “to strengthen the coordination of their (the “Contracting Parties” as we’re called in this) economic policies and to improve the governance of the euro area, thereby supporting the achievement of the Europe Union’s objectives for sustainable growth, employment, competitiveness and social cohesion.”
The brazenness to actually use this Treaty as a way to say it will create jobs is incredible given the debacle that the Lisbon Treaty turned out to be.
Articles 3 and 8 from the “Fiscal Compact” section are the real dangerous parts of this Treaty.
Article 3(1) says: “The Contracting Parties shall apply the rules set out in this paragraph in addition and without [B]prejudice [/B]to their obligation under European Law.”
Then, straight after that and in a nicely sounding way, article 3 paragraph 1(a) says that “the budgetary position of the general government of a Contracting party shall be balances or in surplus” which means austerity until it is put right.
1(a) then goes on to say that the European Commission will decide on how we and the Contracting Parties are performing. If we meet our medium term objectives, we’ll be OK, supposedly. They make it clear later on what the punishment will be. I do love the way though that this pamphlet keeps on saying “Contracting Parties” as if we’re all in this together. It really is comical I feel. We are not the same as Germany or France and will not be treated the same, nor will the rest.
We’re only allowed “deviate” from the medium term objectives in “exceptional circumstances.” It doesn’t actually say what that means, but points to paragraph 3(b) which doesn’t point out what an exceptional circumstance would be. Can we use Enda and Lucy as exceptional circumstances given their ineptitude?
Then 1(e) brings up this “correction mechanism” i.e if we f up, or are deviating, this mechanism will be “triggered automatically.” The Contracting Party will then have an “obligation” to sort this out or else face the consequences. Honestly, I am not a Europhile or wholly against Europe, but this Treaty is fuckin’ draconian and it gets much worse.
In Article 3(b) it elaborates a bit on what “exceptional circumstances” are but doesn’t give any specifics. I wonder about this because if we are falling away behind our “medium objectives” in a year or two and it is coming up to when we need to pay bondholders, will that be an exceptional circumstance and will Europe allow us to renege or defer from paying them? It is far too vague and to be honest, the way our government is, I can’t ever see us using this exceptional circumstance provision, even if we needed too. “We pay our way” and all that.
Article 8 really is madness. If we fail to comply with Article 3(2), and the European Commission feels in its “reports” that the “Contracting Party” is going arseways, the “Contracting Party” will be brought to the Court of Justice by one of more Contracting Parties. Now, I don’t think that will be a unilateral decision with Latvia and Malta asking Ireland to be brought. I really don’t feel that the “Contracting Parties” or Spain and Portugal will be doing it either. I feel that it will be Germany and France that will be bringing these countries to the Court of Justice to sort them out. I mean, have you ever heard anything in your life such as this? It is completely insane. But it gets worse.
If another Contracting Party feels that another Contracting Party has failed to follow article 3(2), it may also bring the matter to the Court of Justice. But again, I can’t see the smaller nations actually doing this or actually being taken seriously by the court.And then comes the most insane part. The part that had Merkel portrayed as a Nazi. In paragraph 2 of Article 8, it says that:
“Where, on the basis of its own assessment or that of the European Commision, a Contracting Party considers that another Contracting Party has not taken the necessary measures to comply with the judgement of the Court of Justice referred to in paragraph 1, it may bring the case before the Court of Justice and request the imposition of financial sanctions following criteria established by the European Commission in the framework of article 260 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.”
It truly is a bizarre Treaty. So much for stability, try chaos. This will guarantee the banking institutions be untouched and the bondholders and will literally hold the countries of Europe at gunpoint. I also fear the power Germany will get from this Treaty as anyone who says it is equal and takes the wording of the Treaty seriously, about the “Contracting Parties” needs to be sent to an asylum.
Anyway, that is why I am voting no to this madness. Bit terse and all over the gaf, but just wanted to say my piece. Going to go over what others have said on here now and see if there’s any good info to get hold of. And can the NO side please ban Joe Higgins from debates, thanks. Send in Declan Ganley, Kieran Allen, Gurgdiev, Somerville and a few others.
The reasons to vote yes I suppose are basically:
- We’re too stupid to look after our deficit
- If we vote no, the ATM’s will attack people and no one will lend us money.
Mr. Aphorisms 8 May 2012
You are invited to join the debate on the Fiscal Stability Treaty at