The ratification process of the Reform-Lisbon Treaty is underway in the United Kingdom. That process is sure to generate some interesting, even heated, debates.
The British House of Commons Library has published an informative research paper on the bill that, if passed, will ratify the new Treaty in British law. The research paper summarizes the Treaty and how it will be ratified in the United Kingdom. Also, there is an Appendix describing briefly the ratification process in the other member States.
The House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee has published this informative, well researched and interesting report on the Foreign Affaires and Foreign Policy aspects of the Lisbon-Reform Treaty. At times it does not spare the British Government some criticism such as when it concludes:
We conclude that there is no material difference between the provisions on foreign affairs in the Constitutional Treaty which the Government made subject to approval in a referendum and those in the Lisbon Treaty on which a referendum is being denied.
The foreign policy similarities between the Constitutional Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty are obvious, but they have been in the public domain since the June IGC 2007 mandate. No surprise there.
Referendum is a stickier matter, in my opinion. It was not prudent for governments to get carried away by promising referendums in the first place.
But after promising, the weaknesses of the EU's treaty basis, which should have been evident, has been more widely understood.
Thus, there is an ethical and practical dilemma:
Honour stupid promises and accept permanent deadlock, ram through an 'elitist' Constitutional Treaty minus, or found a new Union on the EU citizens?
Posted by: Ralf Grahn | January 21, 2008 at 10:56 PM