The European Constitution

I blogged on Monday about the The European Scrutiny Committee's upcoming report. The report has now been published and you can read it here. If you take a trip to here you can see the Labour majority on the committee overriding every amendment put by Bill Cash. You might then want to take look at this section headed "THE CONSTITUTIONAL TREATY AND THE REFORM TREATY COMPARED". Some key phrases jump out:

"Taken as a whole, the Reform Treaty produces a general framework which is substantially equivalent to the Constitutional Treaty."

"Even with the 'opt-in' provisions on police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, and the Protocol on the Charter, we are not convinced that the same conclusion does not apply to the position of the UK under the Reform Treaty. We look to the Government to make it clear where the changes they have sought and gained at the IGC alter this conclusion in relation to the UK."



Moving down the page you will see a heading "THE 'CONSTITUTIONAL CONCEPT'". Some key phrases jump out:

"The IGC Mandate emphasises that the 'constitutional concept' has been 'abandoned' in the Reform Treaty, but it should be recalled that the 'constitutional concept', as referred to in the IGC Mandate, was only the proposition that the existing EU, EC and Euratom Treaties[40] should be replaced by a single text. As the IGC Mandate itself makes clear, the intention is nevertheless to integrate the "innovations resulting from the 2004 IGC" into the existing Treaties.

"Article I-6 of the Constitutional Treaty provided that "the Constitution and law adopted by the institutions of the Union in exercising competences conferred on it shall have primacy over the law of the Member States". This provision will not be taken over in the Reform Treaty but will be replaced by a Declaration. As the Declaration will provide that "in accordance with the settled case-law of the EU Court of Justice, the Treaties and the law adopted by the Union on the basis of the Treaties have primacy over the law of Member States, under the conditions laid down by the said case-law", no substantial difference from the effect of I-6 of the Constitutional Treaty seems intended, or is likely to result."

"Nevertheless, these changes are clearly regarded as substantial by the Government. The Committee is aware that changes in names may be viewed as no more than changes in terminology, whilst the flag and the anthem of the EU were in fact adopted as long ago as 1986"

"Whereas the term 'constitutional' may have a precise significance in the national law of those Member States which have written constitutions, its significance is less clear at EU level. There is clearly a divergence of opinion on whether the existing EU and EC Treaties can be said to be 'constitutional' in that they constitute the European Union and European Community. If this is so, then it would then follow that amendments to those documents are themselves 'constitutional', even if the amendments made were relatively minor. It has also been pointed out that the Constitutional Treaty did not supplant all the previous Treaties in any event, since it only amended the Euratom Treaty, and in that sense did not create a 'Constitution'. Accordingly, we do not consider that references to abandoning a 'constitutional concept' or 'constitutional characteristics' are helpful and consider that they are even likely to be misleading in so far as they might suggest the Reform Treaty is of lesser significance than the Constitutional Treaty. We believe that the Government must offer evidence if it is to assert that the processes are significantly different."



You might now want to visit the Conclusion. Here you will read:

"As far as the substance of the Reform Treaty and its comparison with the Constitutional Treaty are concerned, we accept that references to the "constitutional concept" or "constitutional characteristics" in trying to distance the present proposals from the creation of a Constitution are less than helpful. What matters is whether the new Treaty produces an effect which is substantially equivalent to the Constitutional Treaty. We consider that, for those countries which have not requested derogations or opt outs from the full range of agreements in the Treaty, it does, and refer readers to the table in the Annex to this report."

"We explain in this report our concerns about the security of the United Kingdom's position under the Charter. In our view, it requires to be made clear that the Protocol No.7 to the Reform Treaty takes effect notwithstanding other provisions of the Treaty or Union law generally."

"We wish to emphasise that the proposals in the Reform Treaty raise a serious difficulty of a constitutional order in as much as they appear to impose, whether by accident or design, a legal duty on national parliaments "to contribute actively to the good functioning of the Union" by taking part in various described activities. National parliaments, unlike the European Parliament, are not creations of the Treaties and their rights are not dependent on them. In our view, the imposition of such a legal duty on the Parliament of this country is objectionable as a matter of principle and must be resisted." This is a point that I made way back on 8 August in this article when I said that:

"The Heads of Governments have previously been at these meetings to represent their own governments. Following implementation of the Treaty and the body becoming a "Union institution" their first loyalty must be to the Union and as such their primary aim will be to "promote its values, advance its interests, its objectives, serve its interests." If you look at those parts of the Treaty that set out the "objectives of the Union" you will see how far they extend so as to encompass most of European life including foreign policy, defence policy, economic policy and taxation. Even more worrying is the clause that allows the EU to take any further powers that it sees fit (but that are not specifically authorised to do by the Treaty) so long as the new power is in accordance with the "objectives of the Union". This Treaty is a takeover of the individual countries of the EU by the EU and is as big a transfer of powers as was envisaged by the EU Constitution - there must be a referendum."


"Will Gordon Brown now admit that his line from Prime Minister's Questions on 25 July this year "Let me just read from the mandate agreed at the Council:
'The constitutional concept, which consisted in repealing all existing Treaties and replacing them by a single text called ‘Constitution’, is abandoned.'” was at best disingenuous. As his Labour dominated European Scrutiny Committee says "we do not consider that references to abandoning a 'constitutional concept' or 'constitutional characteristics' are helpful and consider that they are even likely to be misleading in so far as they might suggest the Reform Treaty is of lesser significance than the Constitutional Treaty. We believe that the Government must offer evidence if it is to assert that the processes are significantly different."

Come on Gordon, come clean for once...