Overall the collapse of WTO benefits the Irish economy

The collapse of the WTO talks is on the whole beneficial for the Irish economy. Certainly some Irish manufacturing and service sectors stood to gain from a WTO deal. However its likely benefits were strongly oversold not alone by some big business interests, but also by certain academics and elements in the media.

Irish proponents of the WTO proposals arrogantly dismissed their overall potential negative influences on the Irish economy. Opponents of the WTO proposals were painted as unpatriotic and representative of selfish agricultural interests.
Some big business interests in Ireland claimed to have concern for the poor of the Third World. Of course they were prepared to wrap themselves in a cloak of concern for the poor in an effort to convince a cynical Irish public of the merits of the WTO proposals.

Concessions made by Peter Mandelson at the WTO talks would have put 50,000 farmers out of business and wiped out at least another 50,000 jobs in food processing and services to the agricultural sector in Ireland alone. Agricultural proposals at the WTO would have benefited large ranchers in Australia, Brazil and the US. There were few if any benefits for the poor farmers of the Third World.

The loss in jobs to the Irish economy and devastation of rural Ireland would have far outweighed any potential gains in some industrial and service sectors. Indeed some Irish service jobs are now moving to India-such as Hibernian Insurance. So much for the security of service jobs in the financial sector.

The 100,000 jobs that Ireland stood to lose are based on indigenous natural resources.
We have had too much of the live horse and you will get grass approach-too many half-baked promises. To sacrifice 100,000 jobs would be economic lunacy.
Thankfully Nicolas Sarkozy galvanised opposition to the proposals. Ireland now owes him a huge debt of gratitude.

Mandelson sell out at WTO talks supported by some Irish businessmen and academics

Irish apologists for a sell out quote press releases on farm incomes from Teagasc (The Irish Agriculture and Food Development Authority). Even in the worst years for Irish farming Teagasc comes out with a positive spin in relation to Irish farming incomes. Teagasc figures tell half the story. Where for instance is there a reference to rocketing costs? Interest rates, electricity, gas and diesel prices have spiralled out of control. Farm maintenance, insurance and building costs are prohibitive. Government/EU imposed regulation hinder agriculture. Many farmers can no longer afford to purchase fertilizers. That is the reality. It is not spin.

Academics such as Alan Matthews seek to explain away the negative effects of any WTO deal. Matthews needs to get out of his academic ivory tower. His livelihood is not on the line. Irish supporters of the putative WTO deal make references to EU farm subsidies. They conveniently omit to state that these subsidies are paid as a quid pro quo for production cuts. And now Mandelson is supporting more EU agricultural production cuts.

The IFA assessment of the loss of 100,000 jobs is correct. Not alone will many thousands of farmers go out of business, but thousands of jobs in food processing and other spin off industries will go. Rural Ireland will become a desert. Those 100,000 jobs exist at present. So why should we should throw them away for half baked promises of service jobs that we may secure in the future on the back of a new WTO agreement. It is time to get real. Mandelson wiped out the sugar beet industry. Dairying, beef, poultry will now go the same way.

Academics such as Matthews and certain business elements are prepared to throw away food security for cheaper food imports that often lack traceability. No mention of the health of consumers. The majority of Third World farmers will gain nothing from the proposed WTO deal. The ranchers in the US, Brazil and Australia will benefit. Meanwhile the US increases its subsidies to a handful of ranchers whilst EU farmers will be put out of business.

There is no guarantee that Ireland will continue to increase its service employment on the back of a revised WTO deal. Much of this-within the next 10 years-will start moving to countries such as India. Also there is a strong likelihood that the 12.5% Corporation Profits Tax will be neutered by the EU. I say hold what jobs we actually have. These farming jobs are based on our natural resources. An Irish failure to veto Mandelson's proposals -as currently constituted -would be the ultimate in political folly. Prior to the referendum on the Lisbon Treaty Brian Cowen promised Padraig Walshe of the IFA that he would use the veto if necessary. It is time for the VETO.

Mandelson's WTO cuts: Time to use the veto

Mandelson's WTO cuts would result in:

• €4 billion per annum loss to the Irish economy


• 50,000 farmers put out of business


• 50,000 job losses in food processing and agricultural services


• Beef prices of €2/Kg (70p/lb)


• 1 million suckler cows slaughtered


• Milk prices of 24c/litre


• Sheep industry decimated by imports from New Zealand and Australia


• Damaging losses in pigs poultry and grain


• WTO has wiped out the sugar beet industry


• (Source:IFA)

As these statistics indicate Mandelson's concessions at the WTO will destroy rural Ireland and seriously damage the Irish economy. It is time for the Irish Government to use the veto. The Government must not fudge the issue. Failure to block the Mandelson proposals will result in the destruction of Fianna Fail in rural Ireland. Brian Cowen promised to use the veto if necessary in the run up to the Lisbon Treaty referendum.
The arrogant Mandelson has continued to plough ahead oblivious to the needs of the Irish economy. Put manners on him. Use the nuclear option.

Is Nicolas Sarkozy listening to the Irish electorate?

Today Nicolas Sarkozy visited Ireland ostensibly to ascertain the reasons for the rejection of the Lisbon Treaty. In reality he was testing the waters in relation to a second referendum. It was a cosmetic exercise which was designed to varnish his push for a second vote with a lick of consultation. His comments to a party meeting last week - that Ireland would have to vote again- angered NO campaigners and a sizeable proportion of the Irish electorate. His utterances smacked of arrogance.

Apparently he now has a better understanding of the reasons for the NO vote.
NO campaigners such as Declan Ganley and Patricia McKenna took a very hard line with him.
Even YES supporters such as Enda Kenny and Eamon Gilmore outlined clearly that this imbroglio cannot be resolved quickly. Enda Kenny stated that a second referendum prior to the European Elections would not lead to a clear-cut result.
Apparently Brian Cowen explained the difficulties in rushing into a second referendum. He spoke about analysis and consultation. Mr Cowen also stressed our solidarity with other EU member states and emphasized the desire to secure a resolution to the impasse which would satisfy all 27 members.

So Sarkozy has been appraised of Irelands difficulties with the Lisbon Treaty. The question arises as to whether he will take these on board or not.

As a first step Peter Mandelson should be reined in. The Commissioner for External Trade is prepared to sell out EU farmers to secure a deal at the WTO negotiations. This arrogant individual is not amenable to reasoned argument from farmers. EU food security is to be jettisoned. Similarly he is prepared to accept that the EU will be flooded with cheap food, often lacking traceability. He is prepared to wipe out Irish agriculture. 50,000 farmers are likely to go out of business and another 50,000 will lose their jobs in spin off industry-if Mandelson succeeds. He behaves like a dictator. He personalises all that is wrong with the Commission. He resembles a Czar speaking down to his subjects.
If Mandelson persists with his current approach, a rebellion by the rural electorate will dwarf the previous rebellion in the referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. (Are you listening Mr Sarkozy?) Who controls Mandelson? To whom is he accountable?

The Commission is undemocratic and lacks accountability. It must be reformed. That is the wish of the overwhelming majority of EU voters. Today Sarkozy made the startling admission to Declan Ganley that if a second referendum were held in France, it would be defeated.

The threat to Irelands 12.5% Corporation Profits Tax is real. It comes from countries such as France and Germany. This is a major issue for employers and employees and has the potential to wipe out large segments of Irish industry. Sarkozy favours harmonisation of tax rates. That is the reality.

Many coastal communities face extinction as Irish fish stocks are plundered by trawlers from other EU countries.

Rural Post Offices are closing due mainly to the liberalisation of postal services by the EU Commission. Often the local postman is the only visitor to elderly isolated rural dwellers. Thanks to the EU Commission this is disappearing.


In addition abortion and neutrality are other major issues, which must be resolved to the satisfaction of the electorate.

Verbal commitments on all of the major issues are insufficient. Watertight guarantees are a sine qua non.

Somehow I suspect that Sarkozy is not listening. Waffle and charm mixed with the stick and carrot is not sufficient. It is highly unlikely that the impasse between Ireland and the EU will be resolved during the French Presidency. 90% of the Irish electorate is pro EU. Hopefully Mr Sarkozy will not turn us into a race of Eurosceptics with unhelpful comments. Show us the colour of your money Mr Sarkozy.

New York Times-Roger Cohen attacks the Irish electorate's rejection of Lisbon Treaty in "The Muck of the Irish"

The following are some excerpts from his article in the New York Times titled The Muck of the Irish (Which I rebut):

"…But when it comes to sheer electoral crassness, it’s hard to beat what the Irish have just done. I can’t think of a country that’s benefited from European Union membership more than Ireland. It has catapulted itself in a few decades from beer-soaked backwater to the Celtic Tiger whose growth rates, foreign investment and rags-to-riches story were the envy of every languishing small nation with a thirst for a makeover.

Enormous E.U. farm subsidies, access for foreign investors to the E.U. market, and the liberation from a Britain complex afforded by new European horizons all contributed to the rebranding of Ireland. Dublin was suddenly hip; the peat bogs were passé. No wonder the Irish adopted the euro with élan while the British shrunk from “the Continent” and stuck with sterling.

Yet here we have the Irish, in a fit of Euro-bashing pique worthy of the worst of little-Englandism, rejecting the renegotiated Lisbon treaty essential for the functioning of an expanded 27-member E.U. Biting the hand that feeds you does not begin to describe this act of bloody-mindedness………………………………"

Comment:

To put it mildly this article is insulting and reeks of condescension and ignorance. It is written from a distance and is littered with half-truths. The use of the term beer-soaked backwater is a cheap shot. There is an element of the Paddy bashing about it often heard in British upper class circles. Sure Ireland has benefited from EU membership. Certainly we have access to the huge EU markets. Sure farmers have benefited from EU subsidies. This was not a vote to leave the EU. It was a vote for an improved version of the Treaty.

Cohen makes no effort to investigate possible causes for the defeat of the referendum. Rural Ireland revolted against the oppressive burden imposed by EU bureaucracy. Un-elected Commissioners have made decisions, which have severely worsened the quality of life in rural communities. Mountains of bureaucracy and quotas hamstring farming and fishing. EU agriculture Commissioner Peter Mandelson is viewed as a second Cromwell who is prepared to sell out EU farmers at the WTO. EU Commission restrictions on turf cutting proved the last straw for many. Rural Post Offices are closing because of EU competition rules in the postal service. Often the postman is the only visitor to the isolated homestead of an elderly person.

Fishermen watch as Irish waters are denuded of fish by EU trawlers. Ireland with 16% of the EU sea area has only 4% of the fish quotas. EU trawlers have taken at a conservative estimate €50 billion-€60 billion worth of fish. Some estimates are as high as €120 billion. Ireland is in all probability a net contributor to the EU.

Many small businessmen dependent on farmers and fishermen voted No.
Other businessmen voted No fearing that the 12.5% Corporation Profits Tax is under threat. And it certainly is.

Working class communities in Waterford, Cork, Limerick, Dublin and other cities came out against the Treaty fearing that paid employment has become a race to the bottom under pressure from EU decisions on workers rights and immigrants.
Others assessed correctly that the EU Commission is undemocratic.
There are fears that the EU courts will legalise abortion in Ireland.

Also there is the fear that an EU army would compromise Ireland’s neutrality. Many female voters feared that their sons could be sent to war.

Stupid comments from some French and German politicians and from Jose Manuel Barroso angered the electorate. So you see Mr Cohen your diatribe failed to detect the reality on the ground. In short you are out of touch.

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.

Questions and Answers debates Irish Agriculture

Maeve Dineen Editor of the Farming Independent and Presenter of RTE’s rural life programme Ear to the Ground was the star panelist. She was articulate and direct in her answers. She displayed a clear insight into farming problems and the threat posed to Irish farming by the WTO.

Journalist Eamon Delaney is apparently a strong supporter of Brian Cowen. He emphasized that Ireland has benefited immensely from free trade. This is fine as far as it goes. He obviously supports free trade in food. Unfortunately he failed to refer to the dangers posed by imports -of food products such as beef from Brazil- which often lack traceability. Is he not concerned with the health implications? Is he not concerned at EU hypocrisy on the environment? Apparently the EU is determined to reduce Greenhouse Gas emissions. Yet it is prepared to increase beef imports from Brazil. Much of these will come from the destruction of the Amazonian Rainforests. The burning of the forests will increase the levels of CO₂ in the atmosphere. Eamon Delaney's support for free trade in food fails to take account of the necessity to ensure security of supply.

Padraig Walshe of the IFA emphasized the dangers poised by the WTO. He stressed that 50,000 farmers would disappear and that a further 50,000 off farm jobs would go.

Eamon Gilmore and John Gormley were largely supportive of Irish farmers. Will John Gormley push for the use of the veto if necessary? Will the Government use the veto to rein in Peter Mandelson who appears to have gone beyond his brief at the WTO.

World trade talks: the reality for Ireland if Mandelson's proposals are accepted

In a myopic article in the Sunday Business Post titled Trade about more than farmers Cliff Taylor swallows the José Manuel Barroso and Peter Mandelson line on the WTO, hook, line and sinker. He blithely glides over the effects on Ireland and gives the impression that only farmers are affected. This is arrant nonsense.

Taylor omitted to state the following:

• At least 50,000 jobs are at stake in agriculture, food processing, agricultural engineering, farm insurance and other services. The last four industries were ignored in his article. These jobs would disappear in the short term.


• Food security would be jettisoned. Have we learned nothing?


• The EU would be flooded with cheap food often lacking traceability. Are not EU consumers entitled to high quality food? It is not acceptable to put consumers health at risk.

He speaks about gains in software, business and financial services. Of course there would be some gains. Nevertheless it would be a case of live horse and you get grass.
These gains would not compensate for losses in agriculture, food processing and services linked to agriculture.
Perhaps Cliiff Taylor might care to view the advertisement from the IFA on page 23 of the Sunday Independent.-Message from Rural Ireland Stop Mandelson WTO Sell-Out. This features the businesses affected. This is not just about farmers. Consumers health,food security and spin off industries linked to agriculture come into the picture.

Obviously Cliff Taylor would prefer to buy a pig in a poke.

Govt must move strongly to rein in out-of-control Mandelson - Creed

Since EU Commissioner Peter Mandelson assumed the mantle of EU Trade Commissioner he has pursued a policy of liberalisation of world trade at the expense of EU agriculture. EU farmers are hammered by increasingly strict environmental regulations and EU induced red tape.


Meanwhile a halfhearted effort is made to ensure that Brazil adheres to the same conditions imposed on EU farmers. Recently the EU introduced a ban on imports of Brazilian beef on the basis of lack of proper traceability and other irregularities in beef production methods. This was for the optics and was a cynical ploy to give the impression that the EU was really serious about the irregularities in beef production. No sooner was the ban introduced than it was dropped.
The EU appears to have an agenda to wipe out beef and poultry industries in member states to ensure increased access to Brazilian markets for industry. As a quid pro quo Brazil can flood the EU market with cheap meat produced to low standards. To hell with health risks for the consumer. To hell with food security. It is time to remove Mandelson.

The EU is prepared to import beef from Amazonia. It has no scruples about the burning of the rainforests to facilitate an increase in Brazilian beef production. The resulting huge increase in CO2 from the burnings is of no concern to Mandelson. Has he never heard of the Greenhouse Effect? What hypocrisy.

Today FG spokesman Michael Creed issued the following press release. It is highly apposite:

During Dáil Statements on the WTO today (Thursday), Fine Gael Agriculture Spokesperson, Michael Creed TD, called on the Taoiseach and the Minister for Agriculture to rein in EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson, through establishing a special intergovernmental conference if necessary.
"There is a growing frustration at the fact Mr. Mandelson is acting significantly beyond his negotiating brief from the Commission. He should not be allowed to sell out the interests of European agriculture, and Irish beef producers in particular, to get a deal. It is the responsibility of the Taoiseach and the Minister to rein in Mr. Mandelson. If necessary let us have a special intergovernmental conference where a telling message can be sent to the EU Trade Commissioner.
"The issue of Brazilian beef, which is now available here again, arises in this context. If Brazilians want access to European markets then, in the context of the WTO, let us have non-trade issues on the agenda, such as animal health, that will ensure their products are produced to the standard European consumers expect and European producers have to meet.