NÄR MAN TALAR OM TROLLEN (13/3 2005)
Margot Wallströms syn på oss väljare var på tapeten i min blogg men att hon också var aktuell i min "brevlåda" kom som en överraskning.
Jag ska inte vara så artig som Anthony Coughland, en utomordentligt bildad och fin man, utan vara mer rakt på sak. Margot Wallström borde skämmas, när hon försöker påverka den nationella politiken i Irland och i Sverige också. Sannolikt är hennes aktiviteter olagliga. Men läs Anthony Coughlands brev själv och lär känna EUs smutsiga politik. Margot Wallström och hennes medkommissionärer försöker köpa röster med våra pengar. De opålitliga svenskarna ska över huvud taget inte få rösta!
Och jag förstår att Margot Wallström är rädd - om sin födkrok. När en liten bankkassörska får miljonlön med extra förmånlig EU-skatt, då gäller det att vara om sig.
====================
Här kommer brevet.
FROM:
Anthony Coughlan, Secretary, The National Platform EU Research and
Information Centre, Ireland
Thursday 10 March 2005
Dear Pat Kenny,
re: Commissioner Margot Wallström's involvement in debate on the EU
Constitution in Ireland
I listened with interest this morning to your interview with Swedish EU
Commissioner Margot Wallström, who is speaking in Dublin on the EU
Constitution.
Mrs Wallström spoke about contributing to the Irish debate on the proposed
EU Constitution and the role that she and her fellow Commissioners were
anxious to play in providing "objective" information on the Constitution.
In the lead-in to one of your questions you implied to your listeners that
Britain was really the only EU country where people were so innately
"euro-sceptical" that they would reject the Constitution. As I listened, I
said to myself it was a pity that you did not ask Commissioner Wallström
why they are not holding a referendum in her own country, Sweden.
The reason is of course that if Sweden did have a referendum, its citizens
would almost certainly vote No, just as they decisively rejected the
proposal to abolish their national currency and replace it with the euro in
September 2003. The reason there is no referendum in Sweden is that the
mainstream political parties there do not want a repeat of that experience,
even though there is considerable popular demand that Swedes should have a
say on a Constitution which would have the effect, inter alia, of
abolishing the existing European Union and Community and replacing them
with quite a new European Union in the the constitutional form of an EU
Federation.
As regards attitudes to the Constitution in the UK, it is virtually certain
that there will be a No vote in Northern Ireland when the UK referendum is
held next year, as the three largest political parties there will be urging
that. Would it not make sense for us in the Republic of Ireland to wait to
see what our fellow countrymen in the North think about this proposed EU
Constitution before we vote on it - especially as we are supposed to be
encouraging closer North-South links these days?
I trust you will not mind my saying that one should be chary of
facilitating the European Commission or its individual Commissioners to
play any part in Ireland's debate about this EU Constitution. Or at least
one should be sceptical of their honesty and "bona fides". The Commission
is a hugely self-interested party in this business. The abolition of 69
further national vetoes, which ratifying the Constitution would entail,
would greatly extend the monopoly the Commission possesses in proposing EU
legislation. Mrs Wallström and her colleagues would gain much more power
as a result. The Commission is not a party to the European Treaties, which
are negotiated and concluded between the Member States as the "High
Contracting Parties". One might accept that the Commission has a function
in publicising the treaties and their legal implications AFTER they are
ratified, when the Commission has been given new duties under them, but
surely not before, when it is possible a treaty may not be ratified or come
into force at all. For the Commission or its individual Commissioners to
be advocating support for the EU Constitution and attempting to influence
the vote in various EU countries - as it is currently doing and planning to
do further, and which Mrs Wallström was doing in indirect if polite fashion
on your programme this morning - is a legal and political outrage that I
suggest should offend any democrat or fair-minded person.
Such action by the Commission is quite probably illegal under EU law, for
the ratification of new European Treaties is solely a matter for the
Member States "in accordance with their respective constitutional
requirements" - although it would take a long-drawn-out court-case before
the EU Court of Justice to prove that, and there is a waiting list of over
two years for ECJ cases to be heard.
However intervention by the Commission and its Commissioners in the
ratification process of EU treaties is almost certainly both
unconstitutional and illegal under Irish law - there is now a legal ban on
expenditure by foreign sources in referendum campaigns here - and my
political colleagues and I have every intention of initiating legal action
in the Irish Courts if such intervention occurs.
I enclose for your information a report from the London Times of 18
February which gives details of Commission expenditure on pro-Constitution
propaganda in Britain alone. It would be interesting to find out who may
be in receipt of such Commission largesse here in Ireland. Maybe one of
RTE's investigative programmes might find that worth enquiring into?
I am sending a copy of this letter for their information to Mr Peter Doyle,
Director of the EU Commission Representation in Ireland, to former MEP Ms
Patricia McKenna, to RTE's Director-General and some of your other
colleagues in the station, and to various EU-critics in Sweden whom I
know.
You will appreciate of course that my interest in this matter is purely
"pro bono publico". I have no interest other than a citizen's concern for
proper democratic standards in Irish referendums, and a desire to prevent
the drastic further reduction in Irish and European democracy that would
occur if this EU Constitution should be ratified. I am not a party
politican, so there are no votes in it for me. And there is certainly no
money, unlike in the case of the Constitution's principal proponents,
whether Brussels-based or Irish-based, including Mrs Wallström.
With good wishes,
Yours sincerely
Anthony Coughlan
Secretary
Jag ska inte vara så artig som Anthony Coughland, en utomordentligt bildad och fin man, utan vara mer rakt på sak. Margot Wallström borde skämmas, när hon försöker påverka den nationella politiken i Irland och i Sverige också. Sannolikt är hennes aktiviteter olagliga. Men läs Anthony Coughlands brev själv och lär känna EUs smutsiga politik. Margot Wallström och hennes medkommissionärer försöker köpa röster med våra pengar. De opålitliga svenskarna ska över huvud taget inte få rösta!
Och jag förstår att Margot Wallström är rädd - om sin födkrok. När en liten bankkassörska får miljonlön med extra förmånlig EU-skatt, då gäller det att vara om sig.
====================
Här kommer brevet.
FROM:
Anthony Coughlan, Secretary, The National Platform EU Research and
Information Centre, Ireland
Thursday 10 March 2005
Dear Pat Kenny,
re: Commissioner Margot Wallström's involvement in debate on the EU
Constitution in Ireland
I listened with interest this morning to your interview with Swedish EU
Commissioner Margot Wallström, who is speaking in Dublin on the EU
Constitution.
Mrs Wallström spoke about contributing to the Irish debate on the proposed
EU Constitution and the role that she and her fellow Commissioners were
anxious to play in providing "objective" information on the Constitution.
In the lead-in to one of your questions you implied to your listeners that
Britain was really the only EU country where people were so innately
"euro-sceptical" that they would reject the Constitution. As I listened, I
said to myself it was a pity that you did not ask Commissioner Wallström
why they are not holding a referendum in her own country, Sweden.
The reason is of course that if Sweden did have a referendum, its citizens
would almost certainly vote No, just as they decisively rejected the
proposal to abolish their national currency and replace it with the euro in
September 2003. The reason there is no referendum in Sweden is that the
mainstream political parties there do not want a repeat of that experience,
even though there is considerable popular demand that Swedes should have a
say on a Constitution which would have the effect, inter alia, of
abolishing the existing European Union and Community and replacing them
with quite a new European Union in the the constitutional form of an EU
Federation.
As regards attitudes to the Constitution in the UK, it is virtually certain
that there will be a No vote in Northern Ireland when the UK referendum is
held next year, as the three largest political parties there will be urging
that. Would it not make sense for us in the Republic of Ireland to wait to
see what our fellow countrymen in the North think about this proposed EU
Constitution before we vote on it - especially as we are supposed to be
encouraging closer North-South links these days?
I trust you will not mind my saying that one should be chary of
facilitating the European Commission or its individual Commissioners to
play any part in Ireland's debate about this EU Constitution. Or at least
one should be sceptical of their honesty and "bona fides". The Commission
is a hugely self-interested party in this business. The abolition of 69
further national vetoes, which ratifying the Constitution would entail,
would greatly extend the monopoly the Commission possesses in proposing EU
legislation. Mrs Wallström and her colleagues would gain much more power
as a result. The Commission is not a party to the European Treaties, which
are negotiated and concluded between the Member States as the "High
Contracting Parties". One might accept that the Commission has a function
in publicising the treaties and their legal implications AFTER they are
ratified, when the Commission has been given new duties under them, but
surely not before, when it is possible a treaty may not be ratified or come
into force at all. For the Commission or its individual Commissioners to
be advocating support for the EU Constitution and attempting to influence
the vote in various EU countries - as it is currently doing and planning to
do further, and which Mrs Wallström was doing in indirect if polite fashion
on your programme this morning - is a legal and political outrage that I
suggest should offend any democrat or fair-minded person.
Such action by the Commission is quite probably illegal under EU law, for
the ratification of new European Treaties is solely a matter for the
Member States "in accordance with their respective constitutional
requirements" - although it would take a long-drawn-out court-case before
the EU Court of Justice to prove that, and there is a waiting list of over
two years for ECJ cases to be heard.
However intervention by the Commission and its Commissioners in the
ratification process of EU treaties is almost certainly both
unconstitutional and illegal under Irish law - there is now a legal ban on
expenditure by foreign sources in referendum campaigns here - and my
political colleagues and I have every intention of initiating legal action
in the Irish Courts if such intervention occurs.
I enclose for your information a report from the London Times of 18
February which gives details of Commission expenditure on pro-Constitution
propaganda in Britain alone. It would be interesting to find out who may
be in receipt of such Commission largesse here in Ireland. Maybe one of
RTE's investigative programmes might find that worth enquiring into?
I am sending a copy of this letter for their information to Mr Peter Doyle,
Director of the EU Commission Representation in Ireland, to former MEP Ms
Patricia McKenna, to RTE's Director-General and some of your other
colleagues in the station, and to various EU-critics in Sweden whom I
know.
You will appreciate of course that my interest in this matter is purely
"pro bono publico". I have no interest other than a citizen's concern for
proper democratic standards in Irish referendums, and a desire to prevent
the drastic further reduction in Irish and European democracy that would
occur if this EU Constitution should be ratified. I am not a party
politican, so there are no votes in it for me. And there is certainly no
money, unlike in the case of the Constitution's principal proponents,
whether Brussels-based or Irish-based, including Mrs Wallström.
With good wishes,
Yours sincerely
Anthony Coughlan
Secretary
posted by Margit Gennser at 22:20
<< Home