Looks like they are going to press ahead with Lisbon and create the legal framework for Ireland to be able to accept that... this time, they better put the interests of the Irish people at the heart of the negotiation, we have not participated and led by example in Europe over the last 4 decades to give it all up. Lets see what happens

The legal criteria for statehood are set out in article 1 of the Montevideo Convention. “The state as a
person in international law should possess the following qualifications: a permanent population; a
d e fined territory; a government and the capacity to enter into relations with the other states.”
It is clear that the European Union alre ady possesses the first two attributes. Under the Treaty of
Lisbon it would fully acquire the final attribute, as it would have international legal personality, a
president and foreign minister, and a diplomatic service.
The attribute of “gov e r n m e n t” is made up of many elements. Among them would be a citizenship
of the European Union, which is defined and made legally binding in the Lisbon Treaty. It has a clearly
d e fined external frontier, with free movement of citizens inside that frontier; and the Lisbon Treaty would provide it with a central immigration policy. It would have a fully developed executive (the president of the Council as head of state, with the Foreign Service and the Commission), a legislature (the European
Parliament, in conjunction with the Council of Ministers), and a developed thre e -tier judicial system, with the European Court of Justice as supreme court, a lower Court of First Instance, and a developing furt h e r
tier of specialist courts and judicial bodies. The European Union also has its own currency and would have a common economic policy, with legally binding guidelines on the member-states’ conduct of
macro-economic policy and on budget deficits. It has a common foreign and security policy, it is developing its own armed forces, and the Treaty of Lisbon would in effect provide it with a system of
federal criminal law.

Appeal by 7O7 trade unionists and labour activists
from 24 countries of Europe to their brothers
and sisters in the Republic of lreland
A, lubou, activistsa nd tradeu nionistsf rom every country in Europe,w e solemnlya ddressth is appealt o you, one
month before l2 June, the date on which the people of Ireland will be called upon to give their view on the Lisbon
Treaty through a referendum.
We have become aware of the reasons why the National Executive of the Technical Engineering and Electrical
Union (TEEU) of Ireland is calling on its members to reject the Lisbon Treaty by voting "NO" in the referendum:
"Recent key judgements by the European Court of Justice show that the pendulum has swung against workers'
rights and in favour of big business.I n the circumstancesit would be foolish to provide the institutionso f the
European Union with more power. The judgements in the Laval and Viking disputes accepted workers had the
right to organise in unions, only to negate its value by saying they could not undertake industrial action where it
conflicted with the provision oJ'goods and services, regardless of the social consequencesI.n the recent Ruffert
case the Court found that a Polish subcontractor operating in Germany was entitled to pay his workers less than
hctlft he agreedm inimum wagef or the constructions ector,b ecauset he right to provide unrestricteds enticest ook
priority over collective wage agreernents."
We adoptt his statemenat s our own.
We totally share this point of view, just as we share the point of view of Michael Sommer, President of the DGB,
when he said: "llhat the three recent judgernents by the European Court of Justice have in common is that (...)
they invite wage durnping through the use of foreign labour - also doing so in places where there is no minimum
wage or even a binding collective agreernent."
We agreew ith Derek Simpson,J oint GeneralS ecretaryo f Unite in GreatB ritain: "This decisione ffectivelym eons
that foreign cornpaniesw orking here in the UK, or in any other European country, canf lout domesticl aws and
collectivea greementsw ith regard to pay."
Or as Swedish trade unionists put it recently: "Since Swedenj oined the European t-Jnioni n 1995,S wedish
collectivea greementsh ave been regularly put into question.T his threat doesn ot only affect wages,i t meanst hat
every trade union right is at stake."
Is this not the case in each country of Europe?
Yes indeed, now the three judgements by the European Court of Justice have together become yet another
instrument in the panoply of instruments, from European directives to the Stability Pact, which are all aimed at
driving down labour costs and reducing public spending.
Is it not in the name of theser equirementsw, hich were laid down in the MaastrichtT reaty and restatedi n their
entirety in the Lisbon Treaty, that pension schemes are being wound up, postal services and railways are being
privatised, and public health services are being dismantled?
It is in order to fight againstt he disastrousc onsequenceosf this policy that throughoutE urope- in France,B ritain,
Italy, Germany,P ortugal,G reece,B elgium, Swedena nd elsewhere- the workers togetherw ith their trade unron
organisationsa re standingu p to defendt heir gainsa nd wages,t o fight againstt he privatisationp rogrammesa nd in
favour of renationalisingw hat has been privatisedi n the name of the MaastrichtT reaty, the Europeand irectives
and the Stability Pact.
Thesea ret he reasonsw hy we are addressingth is appealt o you.
Following the "NO" to the Constitutional Treaty voted by the peoples of France and the Netherlands, the big
coalition of governmentsh as ruled out any democratice xpressionb y denying each of the peopleso f Europet he
chancet o give their verdict on the Lisbon Treatyt hrought he referendump rocess.
Everywhere except in keland, where they have been unable to bypass the Constitution.
We know very well that you are coming un