|
Blair’s deal on new
EU treaty ‘largely revives the rejected constitution’
David Charter
London
Times
Monday Aug 20, 2007
A group of Europe’s “wise men”
has pronounced that the European Union treaty agreed by Tony Blair
in June is substantially the same as the constitution rejected
two years ago.
The elder statesmen’s verdict was seized on yesterday by
critics who insisted that Gordon Brown must honour the Government’s
promise of a referendum on the document.
The group, led by the former Italian Prime Minister Giuliano
Amato, and including Lord Patten, the former Conservative minister
and European Commissioner, concluded that the new treaty was only
symbolically different to the proposed constitution rejected by
French and Dutch voters in 2005.
(Article continues below)
The so-called Amato group’s assessment carries weight because
the 16 senior politicians include two members of the convention
that drew up the constitution – Mr Amato and Jean-Luc Dehaene,
the former Belgian prime minister – as well as former leaders
of the Netherlands, Finland and Greece.
It said: “The proposed new treaty and supplementary protocols
take over almost all the innovations contained in the constitutional
treaty. They only leave aside the symbolic changes which were
introduced by the constitutional treaty – such as the title
of the treaty or the symbols of the union.”
The Amato group was formed in 2006 to study the case for EU reform.
The main objectives of the proposed treaty include ending the
national veto on large areas of justice and home affairs policy.
It also consolidates the representation of EU diplomacy into a
single figure – the High Representative for Foreign Affairs.
Both objectives were supported by the Amato group.
Thanks to opt-outs negotiated by Mr Blair, Britain can ignore
justice and home affairs decisions, and will retain full control
over its foreign policy. But the High Representative for Foreign
Affairs will be able to speak for the EU at the United Nations.
The Amato group’s conclusions echo those of various European
leaders, including the Spanish Foreign Minister, Miguel Angel
Moratinos, who said that “the wrapping has been changed,
but not the content”. Bertie Ahern, the Irish Taoiseach,
also said: “Thankfully, they haven’t changed the substance
– 90 per cent is still there.”
The treaty could be formally agreed by EU leaders as early as
their next summit in October, which would begin a ratification
process in all 27 member states.
The Conservatives yesterday renewed their call for a referendum
as part of the British ratification. Mark Francois, the Shadow
Europe Minister, said: “We have consistently argued that
this new treaty is essentially the old EU constitution under another
name and this influential group has now effectively confirmed
this. Labour can simply no longer pretend that this is anything
other than the revived constitution so they must honour their
manifesto pledge and offer a referendum.”
Neil O’Brien, director of the Open Europe think tank, said:
“Amato’s group consists of the people most intimately
involved in the constitution process. They say that the new treaty
is basically just the rejected European constitution in disguise,
and they would know.”
He added: “The Government’s attempt to pretend that
this is a different document has been exploded by other EU leaders
admitting that it’s exactly the same. Now they are falling
back on a ludicrous claim that Britain has signed a different
treaty to other member states, which is just a fantasy.
“The Government say that it is different because the UK
has various opt-outs and safeguards. But they are the same safeguards
as in the original version, on which they promised a referendum.”
Mr Blair promised a referendum on the constitution in 2004 but
the Government now insists that none is necessary because the
idea of a constitution was dropped and Britain secured opt-outs
from the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the extension of qualified-majority
voting.
A Foreign and Commonwealth Office spokesman said: “Let’s
be clear, the Reform Treaty is not the Constitutional Treaty –
in form or content. The mandate says so in terms, ‘The constitutional
concept, which consisted in repealing all existing Treaties and
replacing them by a single text called Constitution, is abandoned’.
“There will be no transfer of power away from the UK on
issues of fundamental importance to our sovereignty.”
A sense of déjà vu?
Sections 1 and 4 Reforms from these parts of
the constitution are all transferred into the new treaty. They
include a new EU foreign minister, a new full-time president of
the EU council of ministers, and a big cut in national vetoes
over decision-making in justice and home affairs
Section 2 This section of the constitution –
the Charter of Fundamental Rights – is no longer included
in full but incorporated and given legal force by a single paragraph.
The charter will be published separately; a clause in the treaty
exempts British law from following it
Left out The omitted parts of the constitution
refer to the EU’s anthem and flag and the concept of a single
constitution
|
INFOWARS:
BECAUSE THERE'S A WAR ON FOR YOUR MIND
|
|
