A TV debate on the EU Reform Treaty: Part 2/3

[pondman27]

The further cenralisation of governemnt powers is opposite to the maintenance of the rights of the individuals. Creeping NWO for corporate and banking elites.

[FilipeBrasAlmeida]

Federalism is not centralisation.

[pondman27]

The design of the EU is driven by corporations, the entire structure can be seen as a pyramid where a few control the masses. The rights of individuals are being progressively diminished (111,500 pieces of legislation) will ensure that no one will be able to avoid breaking the law unless they subscribe to the systems being introduced. Look more carefully and you will find that corruption within the EU is massive with private corporations increasingly influencing the direction taken by law.

[FilipeBrasAlmeida]

The design of your arguments are driven by a rather vivid imagination. If this is the extent of opposition liberalism and federalism will face in Europe, then the continents future in freedom and progress is secure.

[pondman27]

It is less a vivd imagination that forms the core of my arguments, it is instead, the incredibaly complex and obscuring nature of the EU constitution and treaties combined with the integration of financial and multi national corproate strategies. Freedom and democracy will cease to exist - a new post democratic era will emerge.

[FilipeBrasAlmeida]

There is no EU constitution. Before something can be obscure it has to at least exist. If you can't raise the level of the debate I'm afraid my work here is done.

[pondman27]

Oh dear, lets make it simpler for you.

The Treaty of Lisbon (also known as the Reform Treaty) is a treaty signed on December 13, 2007 at a summit in Lisbon, Portugal. It amends the existing treaties of the European Union (EU). It is due to come into force in 2009, if successfully ratified by all EU member states, and would carry out most of the reforms previously proposed in the rejected European Constitution. Thus by default, it is the constitution.

[FilipeBrasAlmeida]

Erm... no. It simply maintains the reforms of Europe's institutions but holds no legal constitutional status.

The reforms are an absolute necessity, for the simple plain reason that an institution cannot function the same way with 27 members (and plenty more on the way) as it did with 15.

[pondman27]

Then I suggest you correct the Wikipedia entry yourself as this quote (aside from the final seven words). So, should I assume, that you are fully conversant with the content of all the treaties and the legislative powers ceded to the European parliament?

[FilipeBrasAlmeida]

If you can show me where in the wikipedia entry for the Lisbon Treaty is states that it establishes a constitution... then yes I'd be glad to edit it, since it would constitute a grotesque error.

[pondman27]

Simply search google for Treaty of Lisbon. Another quote "The Treaty of Lisbon is intended to keep most of the institutional innovations that were agreed upon in the European Constitution, such as a permanent EU president, a foreign minister".

So are you or are you not conversant with the contents of EU legislation and structure??

[FilipeBrasAlmeida]

Yes I am. Now try reading my posts and answering my questions so I don't have to repeat myself.

I posted earlier: "It [The Lisbon Treaty] simply MAINTAINS the reforms of Europe's institutions [that were obviously previously proposed in the constitution] but holds no legal constitutional status."

The reforms are an absolute necessity. Not advancing with these reforms would be like inviting guests over and not providing them a seat at the table.