EUROFACTS … 30 November 2009

Anthony Coughlan
www.nationalplatform.org

LISBON TREATY COMES INTO FORCE TOMORROW, TUESDAY

The Lisbon Treaty, which has 99% the same legal effect as the EU Constitution that was rejected by French and Dutch voters in 2005, comes into force on tomorrow, 1 December.

The European Union Act 2009 was published at the end of October. This Act implements the second Lisbon Treaty referendum result by amending the European Communities Act 1972 which has made European law applicable in the State up to now. The new Act makes the laws, acts and measures of the European Union “established by virtue of the Lisbon Treaty” part of the domestic law of the State.

This is a constitutionally different European Union from what we call the European Union at present, which was established by the 1992 Maastricht Treaty, although its name is the same. This post-Lisbon EU replaces the European Community which Ireland joined in 1973 and which made supranational European laws up to now, and takes over all its powers and institutions. From Tuesday therefore we will all be endowed with an additional citizenship to our Irish citizenship – a real EU citizenship with associated rights and duties, something quite different in its implications to the purely notional or symbolical EU citizenship that we are assumed to have possessed up to now.

The article here explains the constitutional revolution in the EU and its Member States which has been brought about by the Lisbon Treaty and which will formally culminate on Tuesday. This is something that scarcely figured in what passed for “debate” on the Lisbon Treaty in our Lisbon Two referendum. The statutory Referendum Commission completely failed to explain the constitutional significance of Lisbon to Irish citizen-voters, even though that was its prime duty under the Referendum Act establishing it – something the Government and Yes-side interests must be very grateful for.

PEOPLE’S MOVEMENT PICKET ON DAIL … TUESDAY 1-1.30 P.M. The People’s Movement, whose chairman is former MEP Patricia McKenna (photo left), will protest against the coming into force of the Lisbon Treaty and the undemocratic manner in which it was pushed through, in Ireland and across the EU, for half an hour outside Dail Eireann in Kildare Street from 1 to 1.30 p.m. on tomorrow, Tuesday. Interested people are invited to come along with appropriate posters, slogans etc.

LADY CATHERINE ASHTON, BARONESS ASHTON OF UPHOLLAND

Baroness Catherine Ashton is the new EU “Foreign Minister” under the Lisbon Treaty – properly titled “The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy”. The Irish media have so far been remarkably reluctant to give this lady her proper title. The Irish Times refers to her as “Ms Ashton”. Is it not curious, this reluctance to give a member of the House of Lords, which the Baroness remains, her proper designation?

Baroness Ashton will receive an annual salary of €350,000 and have a chauffeured car, a housing allowance and a staff of 20. She will have control of the new EU External Action Service, starting with 5000 staff already engaged on “external relations”, based on EU delegations in 130 countries – and the service is expected to grow rapidly. Current EU foreign policy boss Javier Solana has said the service would become “the biggest diplomatic service in the world”. It is estimated to cost some €50 billion between now and 2013.

This EU foreign service is not open to democratic scrutiny, is likely to develop a life of its own and come to undermine the foreign policies of EU Member States.

The Sunday Times has noted that staff in overseas EU offices typically work a 4-day week, are entitled to first-class travel to and from their posting, as well as private health insurance and an allowance of up to £1,700 a month to spend on school fees.

EU COMMISSION TO “LOOK AT” DIRECT EU TAXES

Agence France Presse reports that in a question-time session in the European Parliament a week ago, European Commission President Jose Barroso said he would look at the idea of raising direct EU taxation. Asked if he agreed with Herman Van Rompuy, the new EU President, that there should be EU taxes, he said: “I intend to look at all issues of taxation in the EU. We have to look at this, we have to look at all resources of the EU. We have promised it to the Parliament, the programme with which I was elected was to look at possible ‘own resources’ and this is in the programme that was adopted by this European Parliament.”

EUROPEAN COUNCIL PRESIDENT VAN ROMPUY AN ARCH FEDERALIST

Herman Van Rompuy, 62, has said that he favoured the Lisbon Treaty as long as it promoted the aim of “more Europe”. He helped to draw up a strongly Euro-federalist manifesto for his Flemish Christian Democrat Party, calling for more EU power. It said: “Apart from the euro, other national symbols need to be replaced by European symbols – licence plates, identity cards, presence of more EU flags, one-time EU sports events.”

Speaking a fortnight ago at a private dinner organised by EU-federalist members of the Bilderberg Group at the Chateau de Val-Duchesse, where the EU’s founding Treaty of Rome was negotiated in 1957, Mr Van Rompuy backed plans for “green taxes” to fund the EU. He said: “The possibilities of financial levies at European level must be seriously examined, and for the first time large countries in the Union are open to that.”

Article 311 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which governs the means of raising money to finance the EU, provides under an amendment made by the Lisbon Treaty that the EU Council of Ministers “may establish new categories of own resources or abolish an existing category”, and the new EU President was referring to that.

Pieter Van Cleppe, of the think-tank Open Europe, commented: “Van Rompuy is your typical EU federalist. He isn’t going to step on anyone’s toes or try to dominate the world like Tony Blair or President Sarkozy might have. But he can be relied upon to quietly make sure that the EU gets more and more powers, with less and less say for voters.”

The new EU President will earn €350,000 a year, taxed at 25 percent, and will have a staff of 22 press officers, assistants and administrators, in addition to 10 security agents. This is double the salary he had as Belgian Prime Minister and is significantly more than US President Barack Obama’s salary, which is around $400,000 a year or €269,000. The total cost of the President and his team will be €6 million a year.

Lisbon’s Constitutional Revolution By Stealth

by Anthony Coughlan
www.nationalplatform.org

With the coming into force of the Lisbon Treaty on Tuesday 1 December, members of the European Parliament, who up to now have been “representatives of the peoples of the States brought together in the Community” (Art.189 TEC), become “representatives of the Union’s citizens” (Art.14 TEU).

This change in the status of MEPs is but one illustration of the constitutional revolution being brought about by the Lisbon Treaty.

For Lisbon, like the EU Constitution before it, establishes for the first time a European Union which is constitutionally separate from and superior to its Member States, just as the USA is separate from and superior to its 50 constituent states or as Federal Germany is in relation to its Länder.

The 27 EU members thereby lose their character as true sovereign States. Constitutionally, they become more like regional states in a multinational Federation, although they still retain some of the trappings of their former sovereignty. Simultaneously, 500 million Europeans becomes real citizens of the constitutionally new post-Lisbon European Union, with real citizens’ rights and duties with regard to this EU, as compared with the merely notional or symbolical EU citizenship they are assumed to have possessed up to now.

Most Europeans are unaware of these astonishing changes, for two reasons. One is that, with the exception of the Irish, they have been denied any chance of learning about and debating them in national referendums. The other is that the terms “European Union”, “EU citizen” and “EU citizenship” remain the same before and after Lisbon, although Lisbon changes their constitutional content fundamentally.

The Lisbon Treaty therefore is a constitutional revolution by stealth.

The EU Constitution, which the peoples of France and Holland rejected in 2005, sought to establish a new European Union in the constitutional form of a Federation directly. Its first article stated: “This Constitution establishes the European Union”. That would clearly have been a European Union with a different constitutional basis from the EU that had been set up by the Maastricht Treaty 13 years before.

Lisbon brings a constitutionally new Union into being indirectly rather than directly, by amending the two existing European Treaties instead of replacing them entirely, as the earlier Constitutional Treaty had sought to do. Thus Lisbon states: “The Union shall be founded on the present Treaty” – viz. the Treaty on European Union (TEU) -“and on the Treaty on the Functioning of the Union.” These two Treaties together then become the Constitution of the post-Lisbon European Union. A new Union is in effect being “constituted”, although the word “Constitution” is not used.

What we called the “European Union” pre-Lisbon is the descriptive term for the totality of legal relations between its 27 Member States and their peoples. This encompassed the European Community, which had legal personality, made supranational European laws and had various State-like features, as well as the Member States cooperating together on the basis of retained sovereignty in foreign policy and defence and in crime and justice matters.

Lisbon changes this situation fundamentally by giving the post-Lisbon Union the constitutional form of a true supranational Federation, in other words a State. The EU would still lack some powers of a fully developed Federation, the most obvious one being the power to force its Member States to go to war against their will. It would possess most of the powers of a State however, although it has nothing like the tax and spending levels of its constituent Member States.

Three steps to a federal-style Constitution

Lisbon’s constitutional revolution takes place in three interconnected steps:

Firstly, the Treaty establishes a European Union with legal personality and a fully independent corporate existence in all Union areas for the first time (Arts.1 and 47 TEU). This enables the post-Lisbon Union to function as a State vis-a-vis other States externally, and in relation to its own citizens internally

Secondly, Lisbon abolishes the European Community which goes back to the Treaty of Rome and which makes European laws at present, and transfers the Community’s powers and institutions to the new Union, so that it is the post-Lisbon Union, not the Community, which will make supranational European laws henceforth (Art.1 TEU). Lisbon also transfers to the EU the “intergovernmental” powers over crime, justice and home affairs, as well as foreign policy and security, which at present are not covered by European law-making, leaving only aspects of the Common Foreign, Security and Defence Policy outside the scope of its supranational powers. The Treaty thereby give a unified constitutional structure to the post-Lisbon Union.

Thirdly, Lisbon then makes 500 million Europeans into real citizens of the new Federal-style Union which the Treaty establishes (Arts.9 TEU and 20 TFEU). Instead of EU citizenship “complementing” national citizenship, as under the present Maastricht Treaty-based EU (Art.17 TEC), which makes such citizenship essentially symbolical, Lisbon provides that EU citizenship shall be “additional to” national citizenship.

This is a real dual citizenship – not of two different States, but of two different levels of one State. One can only be a citizen of a State and all States must have citizens. Dual citizenship like that provided for in Lisbon is normal in classical Federations which have been established from the bottom up by constituent states surrendering their sovereignty to a superior federal entity, in contrast to federations that have come into being “top-down”, as it were, as a result of unitary states adopting federal form. Examples of the former are the USA, 19th Century Germany, Switzerland, Canada, Australia. Lisbon would confer a threefold citizenship on citizens of Federal Germany’s Länder.

Being a citizen means that one must obey the law and give loyalty to the authority of the State one is a citizen of – in the case of classical Federations, of the two state levels, the federal and the regional or provincial. In the post-Lisbon EU the rights and duties attaching to citizenship of the Union will be superior to those attaching to one’s national citizenship in any case of conflict between the two, because of the superiority of Union law over national law and Constitutions (Declaration No 17 concerning Primacy).

The EU will be constitutionally superior even though the powers of the new Union come from its Member States in accordance with the “principle of conferral” (Art.5 TEU). Where else after all could it get its powers from? This is so even though the Member States retain their national Constitutions and their citizens keep their national citizenships. The local states of the USA retain their different state Constitutions and citizenships, even though both are subordinate to the US Federal Constitution in any case of conflict between the two. The tenth amendment to the US Constitution alludes to the principle of conferral when it lays down that powers not delegated to the US Federation “are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people”.

Likewise, it is not unusual for the Constitutions of classical Federations to provide for a right of withdrawal for their constituent states, just as the Lisbon Treaty does (Art.50 TEU). The existence of these features in the Constitution of the post-Lisbon Union does not take away from its federal character.

An alternative source of democratic legitimacy to the Nation State

Under Lisbon population size will in turn become the primary basis for EU law-making, as in any State with a common citizenry. This will happen after 2014, when the Treaty provision comes into force that EU laws will be made by 55% of Member States as long as they represent 65% of the total population of the Union.

Lisbon provides an alternative source of democratic legitimacy which challenges the right of national governments to be the representatives of their electorates in the EU. The amended Treaty provides: “The functioning of the Union shall be founded on representative democracy. Citizens are directly represented at Union level in the European Parliament. Member States are represented in the European Council by their Heads of State or Government and in the Council by their governments…” (Art.10 TEU). Contrast this with what is stated to be the foundation of the present Mastricht Treaty-based EU (Art.6 TEU): “The Union is founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law, principles which are common to the Member States.”

The constitutional structure of the post-Lisbon EU is completed by the provision which turns the European Council of Prime Ministers and Presidents into an “institution” of the new Union (Art.13 TEU), so that its acts or its failing to act would, like those of the other Union institutions, be subject to legal review by the EU Court of Justice.

Constitutionally speaking, the summit meetings of the European Council will henceforth no longer be “intergovernmental” gatherings outside supranational European structures, as they have been up to now. The European Council will in effect be the Cabinet Government of the post-Lisbon Union. Its individual members will be constitutionally obliged to represent the Union to their Member States as well as their Member States to the Union, with the former function imposing primacy of obligation in any case of conflict or tension between the two.

One doubts if all the Heads of State or Government who make up the European Council themselves appreciate this!

As regards the State authority of the post-Lisbon Union, this will be embodied in the Union’s own executive, legislative and judicial institutions: the European Council, Council of Ministers, Commission, Parliament and Court of Justice. It will be embodied also in the Member States and their authorities as they implement and apply EU law and interpret and apply national law in conformity with Union law. Member States will be constitutionally required to do this under the Lisbon Treaty. Thus EU “State authorities” as represented for example by EU soldiers and policemen patrolling our streets in EU uniforms, will not be needed as such.

Although the Lisbon Treaty has given the EU a Federal-style Constitution without most people noticing, they are bound to find out in time and react against what is being done. There is no European people or demos which could give democratic legitimacy to the institutions the Lisbon Treaty establishes and make people identify with these as they do with the institutions of their home countries. This is the core problem of the EU integration project. Lisbon in effect has made the EU’s democratic deficit much worse.
It is hard to imagine that this will not make struggles to reestablish national independence and democracy and to repatriate supranational powers back to the Member States the central issue of EU politics in the years and decades ahead.

N.B. Although the above are major constitutional changes by any standard, both for the EU and its Member States, Ireland’s Referendum Commission, under its chairman Mr Justice Frank Clarke, made absolutely no attempt to explain them or convey their significance to citizens in the Lisbon Two referendum in October. This was despite the fact that the Referendum Commission’s prime statutory duty under the Referendum Act was to explain to citizens how the proposed Lisbon constitutional amendment would affect the Irish Constitution. The Referendum Commissioners were thereby guilty of a profound constitutional delinquency, for which the Government must surely be very grateful.

Anthony Coughlan is Director of the National Platform EU Research and Information Centre, Dublin, and President of the Foundation for EU Democracy, Brussels.

Open Europe’s 50 New Examples Of How The EU Budget Is Wasted

www.openeurope.org.uk

The EU’s accountants – the European Court of Auditors (ECA) – published their annual report on the EU’s budget in early November. The ECA refused to give the EU’s accounts a clean bill of health for the 15th year in a row, owing to fraud and mismanagement in the budget. Like last year however, the auditors did sign off the Commission’s own accounts, saying that they accurately represented how much money was raised and spent.

Although the ECA’s report is about the management of the accounts, the occasion represents an opportunity to take a closer look at the EU budget as a whole. Because while mismanagement of the accounts continues to be problematic, even when EU payments are deemed “clean” they are often still hugely wasteful. This is because the process underpinning how money is spent encourages poor project selection.

National governments are handed a pot of money that has to be spent, regardless of whether there’s a real need or demand for a certain type of project. As a result, EU-funded projects easily become expensive solutions to invented problems. The complexity and needless centralisation of these budget programmes means that taxpayers are not getting value for their money.
To illustrate this, Open Europe has produced a light-hearted list of 50 new examples of EU waste. The list is by no means comprehensive, but designed to show the types of peculiar projects on which EU money has been wasted in the past. They include:
- An art education project called “Donkeypedia”, in which a donkey travelled through the Netherlands to meet and greet primary school children, which was part of the EU’s €7 million ‘Year of Intercultural Dialogue’ initiative.
- An EU grant worth 800,000 Swedish kronor (€80,000), given to Sweden’s third largest city, Malmo, in 2008 to create a virtual version of itself in “Second Life” – a virtual fantasy world inhabited by computer-generated residents.

- €400,000 to get children drawing portraits of each other in the name of European citizenship.
- €198,500 for an EU puppet theatre network in the Baltics.
To read Open Europe’s 50 new examples of EU waste in full, see here:

www.openeurope.org.uk/research/top50waste.pdf

Swiss ban on minarets sparks international controversy

MOSCOW, November 30 (RIA Novosti)

Switzerland’s decision to ban the construction of mosque minarets has sparked criticism from politicians and religious figures worldwide.

The country held a nationwide referendum on Sunday, one of the three questions being whether to allow the building of new minarets – towers on mosques from where Muslims are called to prayer. A total of 57.5% of voters and 22 out of 26 cantons backed the proposal, put forward by the rightist Swiss People’s Party (SVP).

The government and parliament had spoken against the initiative, but were forced to accept the popular vote. Switzerland has 400,000 Muslims out of a total population of 7.7 million.

“A majority of the Swiss people and the cantons have adopted the popular initiative against the construction of minarets. The Federal Council respects this decision. Consequently the construction of new minarets in Switzerland is no longer permitted,” the Swiss government said in a statement on its website on Sunday.

“The four existing minarets will remain. It will also be possible to continue to construct mosques. Muslims in Switzerland are able to practice their religion alone or in community with others, and live according to their beliefs just as before,” the statement said.

Carl Bildt, the foreign minister of EU Presidency-holder Sweden, called the decision “prejudice.”

“It’s an expression of quite a bit of prejudice and maybe even fear, but it is clear that it is a negative signal in every way, there’s no doubt about it,” Bildt told Swedish media.

“Normally Sweden and other countries have city planners that decide this kind of issue. To decide this kind of issue in a referendum seems very strange to me,” he said.

The president of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) said: “Although it expresses popular will, the decision to ban the construction of new minarets in Switzerland is a source of profound concern to me.”

“On the one hand, this decision reflects fears within the Swiss population – and the population of Europe as a whole – regarding Islamic fundamentalism; on the other, far from helping to tackle the causes of fundamentalism, it is likely to encourage feelings of exclusion and deepen the rifts in our societies”, Luis Maria de Puig said.

“The result of this referendum goes against the values of tolerance, dialogue and respect for other people’s beliefs which the Council of Europe and its Parliamentary Assembly have always upheld,” he said.

The SVP’s Walter Wobmann, who led the initiative group that proposed putting the issue to a referendum, said the country’s citizens have long been silently opposed to the construction of minarets, but were able to have their voices heard on Sunday.

“The vote results show the Swiss do not want minarets or Sharia law in their country,” he said Sunday.

Earlier, Wobmann told Reuters: “People may practice their religion, that is no problem,” but that his group wanted to stop “political Islam” from gaining ground in Switzerland.

French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said he was “slightly shocked” by the referendum. “I hope Switzerland will change this decision fast,” he told RTL radio.

Pakistani religious groups also condemned the vote results. “This development reflects extreme Islamophobia among people in the West,” Khurshid Ahmad, a deputy leader of the Jamaat-e-Islami hardline Islamic party in Pakistani parliament, was quoted as saying by AFP.

However, the leader of the Danish People’s Party welcomed the outcome. Pia Kjaersgaard was quoted by the earthtimes.org website as saying it was “good that you can have referendums where people are allowed to have their say.”

Surprisingly, only 37% of Swiss voters had been reported ready to back the ban on new minarets just before the referendum, while 53% said they would vote against it.

Analysts say the ban could cause an outflow of Arab investment from Switzerland.

The leader of the Green Party of Switzerland said on Sunday that the party could turn to the European Court of Human Rights to contest the vote results.

“Switzerland’s Muslims got not even a slap but a punch in the face,” Ueli Leuenberger was quoted as saying by Swiss news agency ATS. “The vote outcome is a result of skillful propaganda.”

Poland to send up to 1,000 additional troops to Afghanistan

WARSAW, November 30 (RIA Novosti)

Poland could send up to 1,000 additional troops to Afghanistan to boost its 2,000-strong military contingent in the country, the Polish Foreign Ministry said on Monday.

The ministry has received a plan drafted by the Defense Ministry to increase the military contingent in Afghanistan.

“There are likely to be less than 1,000 servicemen. A final decision will be announced by Prime Minister Donald Tusk,” Piotr Paszkowski said.

A total of 15 Polish servicemen have been killed in Afghanistan, and over 100 injured since 2001. The U.S. has 68,000 troops in the country, and other NATO states have 45,000.

General Stanley McChrystal, the commander of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), earlier asked U.S. President Barack Obama to authorize the deployment of up to 40,000 additional troops to fight the Taliban insurgency.

The U.S. is also expected ask NATO countries to boost their contingents in Afghanistan, to fill the gap between the 34,000 the Pentagon expects Obama to send, and the 40,000 McChrystal has requested.

WHO-Linked Scientists Mixing Swine And Bird Flu To Create Deadly Virus

theflucase.com

INTENT ON CREATING A DEATH VIRUS

Swine flu and bird flu viruses are being mixed together by French professor , Bruno Lina, affiliated with WHO, potentially creating a lethal virus writes Ester Nordland on the internet news site Norway Health.

Lina and his team are carrying out this research into creating a lethal bioweapon under the pretext of having to predict the course of a future pandemic.

http://www.siste.no/Innenriks/helse/article4726428.ece

In one of the safest laboratories in the world, scientists are intent on mixing one of the most contagious viruses in this world with one of the most deadly ones, she writes.

The goal is to find out whether swine flu and bird flu can end up as a deadly mixture, writes the Norwegian news agency ANB.

Swine flu (H1N1) is very contagious, but ends up only killing a minority of the persons who actually get the flu.

Bird flu (H5N1), on the other hand, kills more than 60 percent of its human victims, but only in rare cases spreads from person to person.

Should those two viruses mix or mutate, a new horror virus might appear: A virus as devastating as the avian flu virus and as contagious as the swine flu virus.

At the Inserm laboratories biosecurity level 4 in Lyon in France deadly viruses like Ebola, Marburg and Hendra are locked in a safe. The laboratory is situated in a building that may withstand both earthquakes and explosions.

The researchers move around in protection equipment reminiscent of space suits withan inbuilt supply of oxygen.

Inserm is the national French institute for human health and medical research.

Now a team of researchers in Lyon intend to investigate whether the H1N1-virus will interfere with its more deadly relative H5N1 and become a virus with the most dreadful traits of both of them. If they discover what kind of mutations will occur, and what kind of influenza may appear, it might turn out to be a key to predict, how future pandemics will evolve.

Until now they have investigated, how H1N1 can develop resistancy towards the pharmaceutical product Tamiflu.

Now the primal investigator of the research team, Bruno Lina, hopes to be allowed to mix the two viruses. – It is a controversial study, but it is fundamental research which should be carried out, says Lina to the magazine Nature. – If you discover, what parts of the H5H1-virus is most prune to change, you are able to be more alert, if the virus change in those parts, says Lina.

Olav Hungnes coordinates the flu watch at Human Health Institute (Folkehelseinstituttet) in Norway. He says that it is a possibility, that the swine flu virus may change.

Hungnes explains that the genetic profile of the virus may chance in such a way, that it takes up genes from another virus.

The prerequisite of swine flu virus and avian virus mixing to a new and even more more dangerous virus is that they come together. But there are so few cases of avian flu among people, that the chances are low, says Hungnes. Read more…

Health insurance will rise by up to 25pc

www.independent.ie

HEALTH insurance costs for hundreds of thousands of customers are to rise by up to a quarter from January, it was confirmed yesterday.

Quinn Healthcare, which has 510,000 members, said its price increases would range from 8pc to 25pc depending on the scheme, number of adults, children and students covered.

The 25pc increase is being imposed on one of its cheapest schemes Essential — pushing up the premium from €420 to €525 for an adult.

The company is blaming the large hike on the Government’s €160 levy which all three insurers now have to pay for each adult on their books.

The €160 charge generates €300m, the cost of the tax reliefs for subscribers over 50 years for whom premiums might otherwise be unaffordable.

The hikes will see the price of cover for a family of two adults and two children on Essential Plus Excess, Quinn Healthcare’s mainstream product, increase to €2,076 next year from €1,776, an increase of around 16-17pc. For an adult on the same cover, the price will rise from €642 to €778.

Donal Clancy, general manager of Quinn Healthcare, said the levy was charged per adult whether they were on a higher priced plan or a low-cost plan.

“The levy represents 48pc of the premium for the cheapest product on the market and just 6pc on higher level plans,” he added.

Hibernian Aviva also increased its prices last month by between 5pc and 12pc for its 240,000 customers.

A VHI spokesperson said no decision had yet been made on its 2010 premium increase — although observers have speculated that it is likely to be over 20pc at least. Read more…

McCreevy’s €1.2m golden handshake

www.irishexaminer.com

CHARLIE McCREEVY will get a golden handshake package worth more than €1.2 million when his term as Ireland’s representative on the European Commission ends in the new year.

Mr McCreevy will get an EU Commissioner pension of €51,068 per year on top of his ministerial pension of €70,710 and pension as a Kildare North TD of €52,213. This will bring his total annual pension to over €173,000.

The outgoing Commissioner for Internal Markets is entitled to a step-down payment of €537,000 over the next three years to help him adjust to losing his generous salary.

He will also get a lump sum of just under €20,000 on leaving office in January as a “resettlement allowance” to help his move from Brussels back to Ireland.

Mr McCreevy will not have to pay tax on these payments in Ireland, but will have to pay a “community tax” which is paid directly back into the EU’s budget.

During his five-year term in Brussels, Mr McCreevy earned more than €1.4 million including an annual salary of €238,919 as well as a €35,837 “residence allowance” for staying in Brussels and a €7,248 annual entertainment allowance. During this time, he continued to earn his €71,000 annual ministerial pension, which was not reduced when ministers took a pay cut earlier this year. Read more…

Irish Government and Media Collude to Carry Out Biggest Crime in Country’s History

Swine flu injections in schools from Monday

THE SWINE flu vaccination programme will begin in schools on Monday, the HSE has confirmed.

A spokeswoman said larger schools would be visited first by vaccination teams “to get higher numbers done in the first batches”.

The HSE has written to the first schools being targeted and others will be written to in coming weeks. All school staff will also be offered the vaccination.

The move marks the extension of the programme from at-risk groups, women who are more than 14 weeks pregnant and up to six weeks after birth, people over 65 and children aged between six months and five years.

By the time this phase of the programme is completed, some time early next year, everyone under the age of 18 and over six months will have been offered the vaccination.

The letters to schools will outline arrangements and vaccination packs will be provided to be sent home to parents with a consent form. Children over 16 will be able to sign their own consent forms.

A HSE spokeswoman said it would not be possible for teams to go into every individual school and in some instances a number of schools may be invited to bring their pupils to another school on the day vaccinations are being administered there.

In other cases pupils and staff will be advised to attend a HSE vaccination clinic and appointments for these children should be made by their parents or guardians.

Minister for Education Batt O’Keeffe has urged schools to co-operate, acknowledging that it will mean some disruption to school timetables. Read more…

Martin: Is there a paedophile ring?

www.independent.ie

THE ARCHBISHOP of Dublin, Diarmuid Martin, asked the gardai to investigate whether a clerical paedophile ring was operating in the archdiocese.

Dr Diarmuid Martin made the request to the National Bureau of Criminal Investigations after he examined files on paedophile priests in recent years. He was disturbed by close connections between a number of clerics who were later convicted of child abuse, according to sources, and asked gardai to investigate.

The priests included Fr Bill Carney and Fr Francis McCarthy, neither of whom are any longer in the priesthood, and Fr Patrick Maguire, a Columban priest, who is living under the strict supervision of his order. The three are among 46 priests named in the damning report by Judge Yvonne Murphy which found “no direct evidence” of a paedophile ring but found “worrying connections” between a number of priests.

Fr Carney and Fr McCarthy worked together to prey on vulnerable children, visiting them in children’s homes and, in at least one instance, abused the same child. Fr Carney and Fr Maguire brought children on swimming excursions together. Fr Carney also claimed that Fr Maguire could vouch for him when he was under investigation for abusing some of those children.

Fr Dominic Savio Boland, whose real name is John Boland, called to the home of a child who had been abused by another priest, Fr Ioannes, and proceeded to abuse the child himself.

“There is nothing in the evidence available to the commission to show how Fr Boland became aware of this young boy,” the report said.

Another priest, Fr Horatio, was given the use of a holiday home by Fr Sean Fortune, a notorious child abuser in the Wexford diocese.

The report says that “Archbishop Martin has referred some of these matters to the gardai in recent times”. Sources close to the archbishop said he was concerned at the connections between the priests and asked the gardai to investigate whether a paedophile ring was operating in the clergy. A Garda spokesman declined to comment on a paedophile ring, but sources said all links between these priests and others in the archdiocese would be investigated.

The findings of the commission on child sex abuse in the archdiocese have had profound ramifications with mounting calls for the immediate resignations of serving bishops who are criticised in the report and a high-level Garda review of the report’s findings on collusion and cover-up.

Taoiseach Brian Cowen yesterday stopped short of repeating Fine Gael calls for the resignations of serving members of the hierarchy. In a statement yesterday, he said it was up to religious organisations to determine the “appropriateness” of individuals to hold ecclesiastical office. Catholic bishops are expected to issue a statement on the report today.

In another development Minister for Foreign Affairs Micheal Martin is considering calling the Papal Nuncio to account for ignoring requests for information from Judge Yvonne Murphy.

A source close to the minister said that he is considering the unprecedented diplomatic move on foot of the Murphy report’s revelation that the Nuncio, the Pope’s ambassador in Ireland, ignored a request to disclose files to the Commission. A second request to the Vatican for files passed to it by the Dublin office was also ignored. A Vatican spokesman, Fr Federico Lombardi, was quoted as saying that the commission did not go through the proper diplomatic channels.

Colm O’Gorman, the veteran campaigner against clerical sex abuse and director of Amnesty said: “I would expect the Minister for Foreign Affairs to summon the Papal Nuncio to Iveagh House to explain why his State failed to comply with the statutory inquiry and on what basis they felt it was appropriate to ignore the request. He is a diplomat; the minister should have him explain himself.”

John O’Mahony, an assistant Garda commissioner appointed to review the Murphy report on Friday, is to meet officers from the Garda sexual assault unit this week. The failings of some gardai were amongst the most surprising findings of the Murphy report, with former Garda commissioner Daniel Costigan among those criticised for passing a complaint about a priest to Archbishop John Charles McQuaid. Read more…

Next Page »