Thoughts on the Lisbon Treaty

Since the article on ‘The Lisbon treaty And The Czech Crisis’ was written, the twenty-six powers have agreed to grant an opt- out to the Lisbon Treaty in respect of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, so as to debar the making of claims for compensation by Sudeten Germans for the loss of property which they sustained when they were expelled from Bohemia and Moravia in 1945. Although this concession was not entrenched, as ideally it should have been, it was a tremendous vindication of
President Klaus's stand. He has now signed the Treaty, which is due to take effect on 01 / 12/ 2009.

The further issue, of entrenching certain basic safeguards, such as the one which so disturbed President Klaus,is clearly going to cause many more difficulties. David Cameron has now declared his intention of enacting a statute in the United Kingdom, if he were to win the next general election, providing that no further constitutional changes should be made to the European Union without the consent of the British people, expressed in a referendum. That would certainly help to avoid the predicament of a partisan government committing a reluctant nation to a controversial and unpopular E.U. constitutional change, but that alone would be insufficient, for an Act alone would always be liable to repeal. David Cameron's intended initial statute would need to be buttressed by a referendum decision, endorsing the terms of the Act.This would be the equivalent to a term in a written constitution, which the the U.K. currently lacks. Any attempt to destroy that effectively entrenched measure would have to surmount the hurdle of persuading the British electorate to cancel the initial Act, backed by its confirmatory referendum, which would be very hard to achieve.

So as to ensure that the Ultra Federalists understand how seriously the U.K.'s voters view the issue of any further changes in the 'constitution' or organizational structure of the E.U. which would purport to transfer more powers and functions to the Union, the initial Act should specify both the newly proposed changes and certain other matters. These would include the so called "red-lined matters," for
which the UK secured opt-outs from the Lisbon Treaty, (although they were not entrenched), and also any further proposed transfers of powers and functions from member states to the E.U. The purpose of doing so would be to create a class of triggering factors, any threat to which would be treated by the U.K. as a fundamental threat to continued membership of the E.U. Thus the lack of entrenchment within the terms of the E.U.would be replaced by a de facto protection, the prospect of secession. Of course it would require great care and skill on the part of the U.K. Government in negotiations in wielding the threat of withdrawal, but it should cause the Ultra Federalists to think many times before attempting to secure further powers and functions from E.U. members.

What many, probably most, British people seek in this affair is the emergence of an E.U., much more in line with what was envisaged in 1975 in the U.K.'s referendum of that year, a free association of independent states, which would deal pragmatically with certain functions on a federal basis, but would otherwise remain sovereign entities, cooperating closely on matters of common
concern.

Michael B. Buck. 10 / 11/ 2009.