Is it true if the Lisbon treaty were to go true that there will be restrictions on workers right to strike.
05.06.2009
Reply from Joe Higgins
Hi Ruth ,
Thanks for your question. What the Lisbon Treaty does is to institutionalise the Charter of Fundamental Rights. This sounds impressive and is designed to be so. The Charter of Fundamental Rights makes clear, however, that the rights it endorses are subject to the Treaties of the EU. These treaties gives business the right to trade and make profits but put that right above the right of workers to maintain a decent negotiated wage and working conditions in any particular industry. Recent cases ruled on by the European Court of Justice such as the Laval case in Sweden and the Rufert case in Germany gave contractors the right to undercut agreed rates of pay in a particular industry. A strike therefore against an attempt to hire workers at rates below the going rate would, according to the ECJ, not be permitted. If rates of pay are fixed by legislation rather than negotiation in a member State, contractors would not be permitted to legally undercut them although in practice this happens all the time for example in the construction industry. We argued these points endlessly in the campign leading up to the Lisbon Treaty and will do so again.
sincerely, joe higgins
Economy
03.06.2009
Question from Ian
As a socialist, what do you believe is the most pragmatic and viable solution to the current employment crisis in Ireland and indeed the European Union as a whole?
03.06.2009
Reply from Joe Higgins
Thanks Ian, Time is very short, there is a lot of pressure so I have to be
brief. There is no point in depending on the failed policies of
neoliberalism which have brought about the economic crisis. The banks should
be taken into public ownership - not the toxic debts - put under democratic
control and investment directed to protect jobs, into projects to create new
jobs and for social ends generally. Companies like SRTechnics at Dublin
Airport which sacked 1,500 workers despite having three years work on the
order books, should be nationalised and the workers brought to the heart of
the management of this enterprise to preserve all those jobs including 60
apprentices. Similarly Eircom which is sacking 1,500 people, while we do not
have a proper broadband infrastrudcture in many areas of the country.
Basically I believe that our economy should be democratically organised for
the benefit of the majority not the corporate elite. on that basis there are
enough resources to provide a decent life for all. Similarly on a European
wide basis, workers need to link up to fight for their common interest as
workers against the massive corporations which are pushing them backwards.
sincerely, joe higgins
The role of regional and local government
03.06.2009
Question from
What are your thoughts on how the latest proposed amendments to the Irish Firearms Acts - as contained in the Criminal Justice (Misc.Provisions) Bill 2009 - contravene the EU directive on Firearms (91/477/EEC) by requiring all Irish firearms owners to only purchase ammunition or firearms from Irish registered firearms dealers instead of the current (and in force since 1964) laws that allow them to purchase from any registered firearms dealer in the EU so long as the appropriate paperwork is in place?
04.06.2009
Reply from Joe Higgins
Dear mark , This is the first time this issue has been brought to my
attention so I am not in a position to give a definite answer. If elected I
would certainly be prepared to dicsuss the question with representative
organisations. sincerely, joe higgins
Civil rights, data protection and political participation
01.06.2009
Question from
is it true you support a socialist ireland joining a socialist uk?
and that you believe the fight against imerialism in this country iwas sectarian>
agree with you on most things but defo not with you on that.
Reply from Joe Higgins
no reply so far
EU expansion
31.05.2009
Question from
What is your position on the Lisbon Treaty?
01.06.2009
Reply from Joe Higgins
Dear ,
Thank you for your query on my position on the Lisbon Treaty. I campaigned against the Lisbon Treaty last year. I attach an article I wrote then outlining some reasons why. please feel free to revert for any further points you wish to clarify,
sincerely, joe higgins
28 May. 08, Mail Column Joe Higgins
If the Lisbon Treaty were passed, would that mean that no EU Member State could veto proposals for market trading and encroachment, as of right, by profit seeking transnational corporations in areas such as Health, Education and Social Services ? The answer is ‘yes’, the veto would be lost, except in some exceptional cases.
The Government and the major political parties supporting the ‘Yes’ campaign are desperately trying to cover up this fact. It is vital that we clarify this issue for the sake of the people voting in the Referendum on June 12.
I thought I had clarified the facts beyond doubt in a major debate with former Labour Party Leader, Ruairi Quinn TD, at the National Forum on Europe in Dublin Castle two weeks ago and again in a debate with former Fine Gael Leader Alan Dukes in a ‘head to head’ debate on the Pat Kenny RTE radio programme this week. Yet, leading spokespersons of the ‘Yes’ Campaign continue to brazenly claim that Lisbon changes nothing in this regard.
It is unfortunate that some people continue to fly in the face of facts. Fortunately, however, we can depend on the written word, the text of the Lisbon Treaty itself. And every voter out there can clarify this for themselves by referring to the relevant chapters of the Treaty, without having to wade through the whole thing which is very difficult to do.
In determining what is being planned for a mandatory opening of our public services to private corporations, the key lies in the section of The Lisbon Treaty entitled, ‘Common Commercial Policy’ especially Articles 188c and 188N which should be read in conjunction with the Protocol On Services of General Interest. These proposals take up no more than three A4 pages of text and can readily be studied by any voter who will see there the truth of the matter.
This is how it would work. The EU Commission would enter talks with organisations like the World Trade Organisation (WTO) about having an international market in services such as Health, Education and Cultural and Audio Visual services. These talks could agree, for example, that multinational companies would have to be allowed as of right to tender for ‘business’ in the Health Services of member States. These corporations are piling on massive pressure for this to happen in the hunt for more profits and have a willing tool in the Commission itself.
Such proposals would then be brought before a meeting of EU Ministers for decision. At the moment any Member State could say; ‘We want to keep our Health Service completely as a public service and we will not be forced to allow ‘for profit’ corporations to take over any part of it’. No one could force any State to do otherwise. This is what is meant by exercising the Veto.
Lisbon removes this veto. Lisbon says: ‘For the negotiation and conclusion of the agreements referred to in paragraph 3, , the Council shall act by a qualified majority.’ Veto gone!
There are two exceptions where the Veto would remain: ‘in the field of trade in cultural and audiovisual services, where these agreements risk prejudicing the Union’s cultural and linguistic diversity; and ‘in the field of trade in social, education and health services, where these agreements risk seriously disturbing the national organisation of such services and prejudicing the responsibility of Member States to deliver them.’
These are exceptions written into Lisbon, not a continuation of the existing comprehensive veto which the ‘Yes’ side is trying to maintain. And no Irish government could convincingly argue in the EU that being forced to open up our Health Service to more corporate encroachment would be damaging when the current government has given substantial contracts for kidney dialysis and cervical cancer screening to major corporations which have been convicted of fraud in the United States and fined hundreds of millions of dollars.
It would be foolish to take the attitude that the government here is already privatising parts of our Health Service, so what does Lisbon matter? The fact is the Irish people can kick out a government and force a change in policy. But if the Veto is gone, a new government could claim that it had no option except to continue a privatisation policy.
This is also very relevant in the current WTO talks on agriculture. The Veto on agricultural policy was given away long sine. The only reason there is the possibility of a Veto in the current talks is because some services are involved as well and therefore, any Member State can exercise that Veto on the whole package. Should Lisbon be passed that could not happen again.
Candidates
