Reflections on Ireland's rejection of the Lisbon Treaty-Some lessons for EU Commission

Just been listening to Newstalk’s discussion on Ireland’s rejection of the Lisbon Treaty.
Journalist Michael O’Regan took a very hard line on some of the No voters. However I thing that it is necessary to delve into the mindset of NO voters.

Critics of the No vote in common with the major political parties and the EU Commission have failed to get the message been sent out by voters in countries such as Ireland, France and Holland.
The No vote is not a rejection of the EU. However it is a message to integrationists to slow down. Many in Ireland see the EU Commission as remote undemocratic and at times dictatorial. Comments from Jose Manuel Barroso, President of the European Commission and some French politicians cemented this view.

Farmers labouring under increased EU induced bureaucracy and quotas have begun to realise that their way of life is under serious threat. The destruction of the Irish Sugar beet industry by the EU Commission has alarmed farmers and struck a psychological blow. Whilst it may have slipped from public consciousness it was at the back of many farmers minds. The fear is that the dairying, beef, poultry and pig farming sectors will disappear in a similar manner.

Yet the Commission is perceived in rural Ireland as not taking a hard line with on foreign food imports which lack traceability. EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson’s antics at the WTO negotiations where he appears prepared to sell out agriculture struck terror into farmers. There is a feeling that Commissioners are too powerful and not accountable to the electorate.

As farming declines large numbers of small businesses dependent on farming are under pressure. Many small businessmen, shopkeepers et al voted No for this reason.
Many workers in food processing voted No fearful for their jobs.
As EU inspired liberalisation of the postal service comes about the rural Post Offices have come under increasing threat.
The coastal communities hammered by EU regulation-specifically fishermen- are on the verge of revolt.

The reality that much of the productive sector in rural Ireland is increasingly hampered by EU Commission induced regulation.
Many people’s backs are to the wall. Elites in the Pale have failed to take cognisance of the the economic stresses building up in rural Ireland

Others voted No because the 12.5% Corporation Profits Tax is under threat. This is not a groundless fear. France and Germany appear determined to destroy Ireland’s competitive advantage. Ireland must defend this tax rate at all costs. There can be no surrender on this issue.
There is a strong fear that the EU Court of Human Rights would impose abortion on Ireland.
Working class voters-many of whom had begun too see living standards rise- have seen a rise in unemployment.

In summary the EU Commission has scored an own goal. It comes across as arrogant and out of touch not just to many Irish voters but many voters in France, Germany, Holland and Sweden. It needs to listen. It must be made more accountable. It must become more democratic. If it persists in ignoring large numbers of EU voters it runs the risk of spawning new extreme right wing and left wing parties.

Cast iron guarantees on issues such as Corporation Profits Tax, Social legislation and Irish agriculture are a sine qua non in any new negotiations to salvage the Lisbon Treaty. A little humility from the EU Commission mightn’t go amiss either.

Ireland: Proposed World Trade Deal could mean BSE, Bird Flu & Foot and Mouth on your plate - Creed

According to Michael Creed -Fine Gael Agriculture & Food Spokesperson- the World Trade Deal could open floodgates to inferior quality food.
European consumer agencies have continuously focussed their attention on the price of food. Of course this is only right and proper. However less attention is paid to the dangers posed by cheap food imports to the EU. These are generally produced to inferior standards and in some cases may pose a threat to health. In many cases there is little traceability. EU farmers have been crushed by regulation and red tape. The highest standards of traceability are a sine qua non.
The EU Commission has failed to insist on the same levels of traceability for beef and chicken imports.

The Commission appears determined to sacrifice EU agriculture to ensure greater access to Third World markets for industrial exports. It is prepared to sacrifice security of supply. It appears negligent in its attitude to health threats posed by food imports to the EU.

The FG party has decided to put down a Private Members Motion in the Dail:
The following is the text of the FG press release:

Fine Gael Agriculture & Food Spokesperson Michael Creed TD has warned consumers of the threat posed to Food Safety in this country by the proposed World Trade deal currently being negotiated. Speaking prior to this week's FG Private Members' Motion calling on the Government to take action to prevent the deal being finalised, Creed has issued a stark warning to Irish consumers.

"Irish food producers have worked tirelessly, and invested heavily to ensure that the food on our tables is of the highest quality and fully traceable to source. The current World Trade Deal on offer will mean that all their efforts were in vain - as the EU market will become fully exposed to imports from dollar-a-day economies, where hygiene, food safety and animal welfare are non-issues.
"The Government has failed in their responsibility to consumers, by not ensuring that food safety is a pre-requisite to any World Trade deal. We will be subjected to Battery Poultry from Asia, Brazilian Beef which has already been condemned by the European Food and Veterinary Office, and who knows whatever else from every corner of the world.
"It is widely believed that agreement on the World Trade Deal is imminent. Consumers need to be made aware of the potential horrors that are in store if the Government doesn't act now."
Ends

Text of Fine Gael Private Members' Motion below:
That Dáil Éireann Notes:
- With concern the political failure of the Government to have non-trade issues debated in the context of the World Trade Organisation Talks.
- The concessions already made to the WTO by the EU in CAP reforms in 2003.
- The failure of the Government to honour its own commitments in this regard as outlined in the Programme for Government.
- The fact that the current proposals would devastate Irish Agriculture and in particular would decimate the Irish Beef Sector with the loss of thousands of jobs both at Primary Producer and Processing Level.
- That the Common Agricultural Policy currently provides EU consumers with a safe and secure supply of food produced to the highest environmental and animal welfare standards.
- The financial consequences to the Irish economy to be at least €4 Billion P.A.
The current conflict between the WTO proposals as pursued by Commissioner Mandelson and Article 39.1 of the Treaty of Rome.
Calls on the Government:
- To mount a major political and diplomatic initiative to protect the Common Agricultural Policy and Irish Agricultural interests.
- To ensure that food safety & security, climate change, animal welfare, and human health interests are priorities in the context of any future agreement in the WTO.
- To immediately publish a sectoral analysis on the impact of the current proposals for Irish Agriculture.
- To signal its willingness to use all necessary measures to defeat the current WTO proposals.

EU Restrictions on Brazilian beef-unanswered questions

The EU's Food and Veterinary Office in its missions to Brazil has encountered chronic abuse of production standards as has an IFA delegation. The US, Australia, Japan and South Korea have banned all imports of beef from Brazil yet the EU has only introduced a partial ban. Why is the EU insisting on higher standards of traceability from its farmers than from Brazilian farmers?

The EU Commission appears to have an agenda to restrict production by indigenous farmers and to sell out on agriculture. The Commission is determined to increase access to the Brazilian market for manufacturing industry. As a quid pro quo it will allow access to Community markets for Brazilian beef.

The EU has lambasted the US on its emissions of Greenhouse Gases. Yet the EU Commission is prepared to accept imports of Brazilian Beef from ranches in Amazonia. These ranches have been created through the burning of the rain forests. This practice continues and is increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere. Why has the EU Commission chosen to ignore damage to the environment caused by ranchers in the Amazon Basin?

Minister for Agriculture Mary Coughlan had refused to support a full ban on beef imports from Brazil. Then 24 hours before the EU announcement of a partial ban she called for a full ban. Why the about-turn?

Michael Creed the FG Spokesman on Agriculture has stated that "Brazil should face a total ban until it is meeting the production standards that Irish and European producers are obliged to meet and EU consumers are entitled to expect." In this he has been totally consistent unlike the Minister.

EU Commission fudges on Brazilian beef - Creed

Fine Gael Agriculture Spokesperson, Michael Creed TD, has said the EU Commission is bending over backwards to give Brazil every opportunity to stay in the European market with its recent proposals.
Deputy Creed said this is in sharp contrast to how the Commission deals with European beef producers who breach EU production regulations.
"This is not equivalence in terms of production standards that Irish and European producers are obliged to meet and EU consumers are entitled to expect. This fudge does little to instil confidence in the Commission's handling of this matter as it appears there is one law for Brazil and another law for EU producers."

EU must ban Brazilian beef imports.

According to Farming Life "ANGER at news that the Brazilian government is seeking even more time to get its house in order on traceability has been expressed by Irish Cattle and Sheep Association beef chairman, Robin Smith.
Reports indicate that Brazilian Agriculture Minister, Reinhold Stephanes, is travelling to meet with the European Union this month to seek more time (beyond the end of the year) to conclude the implementation of their traceability system, known as Sisbov. "ICSA cannot believe that any more time can be given to the Brazilians – they are due an FVO inspection on November 5, and either they have things right or they don't. "If, after many years off broken promises on animal traceability, they still can't get it right, then it would be an outrage and highly negligent if the EU bails them out once again,'' said Mr Smith.................



The EU Commission has imposed stringent regulations on traceability for farmers within the community. This is laudable and in the interests of the consumer. Unfortunately the Commission is adopting a different approach to Brazilian Beef imports. Whilst all cattle in Europe must be individually identified from birth, retain two ear tags throughout their life and have all movements recorded on a central computer database Brazil fails to meet this requirement.



In addition the rain forests are cleared with slave labour. According to the Telegraph "In remote areas where Brazil's forest is being hacked out of the way for cattle grazing, David Ismail, a Perthshire farmer found conditions among the homeless labourers and their employers "like the worst scenes in apartheid". He said: "I was shocked when I found how the growth into Europe of Brazilian beef was causing so many problems in Brazil."


His report says that illiterate, landless labourers, housed in shacks, were deprived of medical assistance and sometimes chained to trees. The labourers, mostly from the poor north-east, are brought in to cut down the forest of central Brazil with rough tools and are unpaid, bullied, brutalised and sometimes shot. They are promised high wages, only to find that their board and rations exceed what they are paid.
The workers are described within Brazil as slaves. The Ministry of Labour's Special Anti-Slavery Enforcement Team, set up to hunt down some of the world's last true slaves, managed to release 11,946 of these individuals between 2000 and 2004...."

The EU Commission is complicit in the destruction of the rain forests-a major contributory factor to global warming. It appears to have turned a blind eye to slavery on cattle ranches in Brazil. It does not insist on the same level of traceability for Brazilian farmers as EU farmers. It stands indicted by EU consumers and farmers.

It is concerned with opening up the Brazilian market to European industrialists. As a quid pro quo European agriculture is to be sacrificed on the altar of political and commercial expediency.

Brazilian beef imports must be banned until such time as the same levels of traceability obtain in Brazil as in EU countries.