Allister opposes revival and implementation by stealth of EU Constitution

10 January 2006

In advance of a major debate next week in the European Parliament in Strasbourg on the future of the proposed EU Constitution, Ulster MEP, Jim Allister, has responded to calls by the Austrian Presidency to revive the Constitution.

Mr Allister said:-

“The suggestion by the Austrian Foreign Minister, Ursula Plassnik, that the EU Constitution can and should be revived, is itself a rejection of the democratic route to implementation set for itself by the Constitution. The Constitution sets its own test for survival, namely approval by all 25 states.  It has failed its own test.  The Austrian Presidency of the EU cannot avoid or evade that reality.

Next week the European Parliament will debate a report on the so-called period of “reflection”, which also tries to rewrite history and avoid political reality. The new catchphase of the Constitution’s proponents is that the issue is “context, not text”.  Nonsense!  It was the text that was voted on and the text that was rejected.

Thus none of it is acceptable and none of it should be cherry-picked into operation.  Of course, with the typical arrogance, which hallmarks the EU leadership, we are already seeing backdoor implementation.  Projects, which ultimately depend for their legitimacy and legality upon universal ratification of the Constitution, are being pushed forward as if such ratification had occurred. These include:-

1. EXTERNAL ACTION SERVICE

The EAS being put in place is clearly designed for the Union as anticipated by the Constitution, particularly having regard to the strengthened competence in CFSP. Indeed, it is intrinsically linked to the premise that the Foreign Affairs Minister would have taken up his mandate.  The EAS will represent the entire Union, arising from its single legal personality bestowed by the Constitution, yet such personality is withheld by non-ratification. The preparatory work anticipated by Declaration 24 annexed to the Constitution, was clearly on the assumption that the Constitution would be ratified, but it has been rejected!

2. COMMON ASYLUM POLICY

The draft Constitution aims at the development of a common asylum policy, whereas the present treaties only aim at the fixing of minimum standards.  Yet work proceeds to put in place a common policy.

3. EXTERNAL BORDER AGENCY

Regulation 2007/2004 establishes an External Border Agency, as anticipated by III-265 of the Draft Constitution.  Yet Articles 62 and 66 TEC only provide for cooperation and the establishment of standards and procedures, not the establishment of an Agency.

4. EUROPEAN AGENCY ON FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

With the Charter of Fundamental Rights being an integral part of the Draft Constitution, it clearly is the prime justification for an Agency to oversee implementation of such rights.  Yet, though the Constitution is stalled, the Agency proceeds.

5. EUROPEAN DEFENCE AGENCY

It is I-41.3 and III-311 of the Draft Constitution which provides the legal basis for this Agency, yet despite the Constitution being non-operative establishment of the Agency is proceeding.

6.  Action is also proceeding, as if ratification had occurred, on the European Space Policy, what amounts to an EU Criminal Code, with a European Public Prosecution Office, and, of course, the appointment of the Union Foreign Minister.”

EU Constitution