New Treaty, mini - Treaty, Reform Treaty, Reform Treaty, Reform Treaty, Treaty different ... The debate on the nature of the treaty replacing the European Constitutional Treaty is not that a dispute form. The argument varies according to the party. Supporters of the Yes it is explained that they have every reason to be satisfied and to support the treaty as amended because, in substance, nothing has been changed. Supporters of non-majorities in France, explained that there is no reason to oppose it because all that was problematic was removed. This confusion deliberately maintained, this shell game, owe nothing to improvisation. This is the calm one another so that they do not pose too many questions, to send the case would justify the refusal of any public consultation by referendum. "The alibi of the Constitutional Treaty being lifted," it should no longer be an obstacle to ratification, high speed and by parliament, the "new" treaty.
for a referendum in France and other European countries The determination of Nicolas Sarkozy to cut corners to achieve ratification in the snatch of "his" treaty becomes suspect in the eyes of public opinion. For him, France would be the first to ratify, as if it had to be forgiven his indiscretion in the 2005 referendum. Especially in Europe there are a ripple effect. Despite the pressures and blackmail, over days, the growing conviction that a referendum. It became the central issue of debate. It is primarily a matter of principle. Over 60% of French and French, beyond their feeling on the treaty, desire. There are new treaty because there was rejection of the Constitutional Treaty: 55% they voted against the previous version. It is right to be consulted on the new project. Only a popular vote can validate and legitimize the new conditions of the European commitment of France. In addition, it appears that the Treaty of Lisbon treaty embodies the essential rejected. This is reason enough to re-consult the people.
Finally, we have entered a pivotal period. In 2008 with the French Presidency of the European Council, the European elections in 2009, the organization of referendums creates the conditions most favorable for either re-open the popular debate on the future of Europe changes to be made, and that across Europe.
New Treaty or TEC recycled? So new treaty or a new version of the rejected treaty? It is best to return to the text itself to see what's going on. Arduous task, even harder than the Constitution. Finally, the referendum debate had turned the text rather austere, revealed by Humanity, a best-seller. The Treaty of Lisbon concocted by a panel of lawyers is an impenetrable jungle of hundreds of amendments in a document of 255 pages including a preamble, the treaty itself, 12 protocols and 53 declarations annexed.
It is possible to examine its continuity with the Constitutional Treaty, especially if account was taken of the concerns and expectations expressed in the vote not the French and Dutch.
This treaty is new in that it was developed in the few weeks of summer 2007 to replace the constitutional treaty invalidated by the negative votes of the French and Dutch referendums. It includes new features compared to the treaty and rejected new compared to treaties precedents (the Treaty of Rome and Maastricht Treaty amended at Amsterdam and Nice).
Compared to the Constitutional Treaty, the changes focus on the symbols: it is no longer a "constitution". We removed the references to the Ode to Joy by Beethoven, and the flag, which will continue to operate as before. It is true that the Charter of Fundamental Rights is no longer included in the text, however it is fixed in a protocol that makes it binding, except for those States that have asked not to be submitted. (Great Britain, Poland ..)
Compared the old treaties, it has institutional changes which, for the most part, were enshrined in the Constitution: Election of Chairman for two and a half years - instead of the six-months old today, once renewable, appointment of a High Representative for Foreign Affairs who will be the vice-president; redefinition of majority voting, extend the areas of co-decision involving the European Parliament; eventual reduction in the number of Commissioners; extending 6 to 8 weeks of review period given to national parliaments. The Non
ignored 
Thus equipped with these institutional innovations, Europe could finally start to a good start. It would be out of the crisis of impotence of the Nice Treaty and crisis of confidence generated by the French and Dutch. Is this serious? By reducing the crisis to a European institutional deadlock, and a misunderstanding of peoples bad bedfellows, Nicolas Sarkozy and European leaders find rest is cheap, or rely on surprise, fatigue, confusion to get TODAY 'hui in 2005 which based its rejection of the Constitutional Treaty.
The non-French was a lucid and informed reaction to policies perceived as social regression, increasing social insecurity and undermining the foundation of solidarity still exists, without opening perspective. Everyone knows how this choice weighed in the revelations about the content and consequences of the Bolkestein directive, the legitimate concerns on public services, including outreach, such as mail.
Competition as an intangible dogma Nicolas Sarkozy has boasted of having removed the objectives of the Union "the free and undistorted competition". It's a shell game. The principle of competition remains at the heart of all EU policies. Article 105: "the principle of an open market economy with free competition". Protocol 6: "The internal market as defined in section (I-3) of the Treaty includes a system ensuring that competition is not distorted."
The consequences are explicit for public services, they too subject to competition rules: Article 86: "Undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general interest or having the character of a monopoly shall be subject to the rules treaties, including rules of competition. "(Article 86). It states" insofar as the application of these rules does not obstruct the performance in law or in fact of the particular tasks assigned to them. "In Here the rule is competition and the interpretation will depend on the balance of power, the will of the Committee and jurisprudence to date always procompetitive.
Article 87. "Unless otherwise provided by treaties, are incompatible with the internal market (...) aid granted by States or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favoring certain undertakings or certain products. "It is the possibility of a coherent industrial policy and long term, or the principle of subsidies that are, or may at any time be called into question. Airbus and energy are examples illuminating.
The impossible tax harmonization While competition is a dogma, and that the "labor market" is released as the of "capital", as in the Constitutional Treaty, the business tax is under no common rule - unlike the VAT - The field is totally open to dumping tax and the introduction of competition on the basis of lowest price and tax office.
The European Central Bank untouchable No change in mission definition and role of the ECB. Critics and rants had not failed during the election campaign. No change to provisions contained in Part III of the ECT. One goal: to fight against inflation to preserve the financial market. Nothing on employment and growth. (Article 105 reinforced by Article 245 bis). "The ECB is independent in the exercise its powers and in managing its finances. Institutions and bodies of the Union and state governments shall respect that independence. "(Article 108)
allegiance to NATO A policy of peace and security independent of U.S. united, inventing relations of cooperation and peaceful demilitarized with its neighbors is a cornerstone that can legitimize a common construction in Europe. But on this issue so crucial to peace, the copied text is pasted from the TEC: "The commitments and cooperation in this area shall be consistent with commitments within NATO, which remains for states that are members of the foundation of collective defense and the forum for its implementation. "(Article 27-7 TEU) As in the ECT, it is stated that" States shall undertake progressively to improve their military capabilities. "(Art.27-3 TEU).
If we stick to the text itself we find that indeed the substance of the Constitutional Treaty is preserved . This was the observation meets Angela Merkel, German chancellor. Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, the father of the constitution says that unvarnished "the difference is more on the way than content (...) Regarding the responses to the opponents of the constitutional treaty, we must note that they represent more satisfactions of politeness that substantial changes (including competition) of the text (...) Articles of the Constitutional Treaty, is virtually unchanged, but it is dispersed in amendments to previous treaties. "And he concludes, on the ratification:" It should not encounter great difficulties because the complication of (...) text and its abandonment of grand ambitions are sufficient to smooth out rough edges. " (Le Monde October 27 2007)
Europe out of its crisis This continuity between the Constitutional Treaty and the Treaty "Sarkozy" calls for less public debate. If it's cook that was rejected, we need things to be said. About democracy. After the 2005 referendum vote, the commitment of France for a long time to come requires further validation or invalidation by the popular vote.
Equally serious is the extension of the base and the neoliberal policies are based, would lead to another impasse. Before the earthquake of non-French, several European leaders had to admit - even if not publicly - that European integration was going through a crisis of popular legitimacy. Not for institutional reasons, but for its social and democratic deficiency. Those who do not want to see that the not is not the cause of the crisis but his words carry the popular and political risk of its deterioration. Beyond even the rigorous criticism of the Treaty, as recycling of the Constitution and its foundations libertarians, for the defeat, we must prevent that closes the prospect of change initiated by the rejection of the Constitutional Treaty. We must keep open the site of reforms and to put breaks effort to advance in the construction of a new development model, social, ecological, interdependent. It is simply to face the challenges of the period and to respond, finally, popular expectations.
