Business in Europe - Case Study Example

Introduction European Union, also known as EU, was created year 1992 and is still is growing. From 12 nations that signed the Maastricht Treaty in the year 1992, it became 15 in 1995, 25 in 2004 and in 2007 it finally became 27 (Valla 2008). The Treaty of Nice, which took into effect on February 2001, is the first attempt to restore the workings of the EU as it included new countries that are mostly from the Eastern Europe. As the union expands, the requirement of unanimous decision (unanimity) and the right of every country to exercise veto were becoming ineffective (Valla 2008). Thereafter, the Lisbon of Treaty emerged to modify the functioning of the European Union after the major enlargement of the Union which began in 2004 and eventually increased the number of the EU member states from 15-27 countries. (EEPA 2008). Leaders of the twenty-seven Member states in Lisbon signed the Treaty of Lisbon on 13 December 2007 (National Forum on Europe 2009). Last June 28, 2008, a referendum on the Treaty of Lisbon was held. The only country that put the Treaty to a referendum is the country of Ireland. Other Members of EU have chosen to ratify through their respective parliaments (National Forum on Europe 2009). European Union’s way of governing and operation will change the moment the Lisbon Treaty enters into force. It will affect the voters, the voters who have an important role in deciding on this important issue. If these voters do not seek information about Lisbon Treaty and do not exercise their right to vote, other people might make the decision for them (The Lisbon Treaty 2008). The Ratification of Treaty of Lisbon will influence not only a single entity but also major aspects of Ireland. Some of these aspects are the following: the business Sector, militarism, democracy, conditional rights, trade, justice and etc. but this paper will focus only on the question of whether the “liberalization” objective of the Treaty of Lisbon is beneficial to the EU members particularly to Ireland. Body Ireland is the only country that has the power to stop it through the process of referendum. This treaty is considered tyrannical as it seems to end the democracy of the participating nations particularly of Ireland. This might be the biggest threat for Ireland since the time that it was able to obtain its independence and the defeat of this threat lies in the hands of its half a billion people. The major problem first seen in trying to take the Lisbon Treaty into effect is the effort of the European legislators to make the treaty unreadable as possible, making it hard or even possible to read the most important new provisions and the modification to the previously approved constitution. In this way, its framers will be able to pass it and avoid thorough perusal of the participating nations/members. According to various sources, the treaty contains provision that would restore the death penalty and dominate national decision making on critical issues (Congress Check 2008). Also, there are provisions therein that insinuate the militarization of EU as all members of the state were called to increase military spending and require providing available facilities for EU military activity. It strengthens EU-NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) relations. Sub-group of states were allowed to form military alliance within the EU and in cooperation with US-dominated NATO and the non-participating states will not be allowed to participate in its discussions and to challenge its decisions (CAEUC.org 2008). Through the Lisbon Treaty, EU institutions are only given power to touch the policy areas and the only EU body that has the power to draft laws for it is the European Commission. Thus, the people have no bearing in the drafting of the laws since there is no direct relation between the people and European Commission (CAEUC.org 2008). The Lisbon Treaty also proposes the escalating of the trade sectors that the EU wants to liberalise putting more pressure on the developing countries. By “liberalization”, the restrictions in the international trade are progressively eliminated and the customs barriers are then lowered allowing foreign direct investment (CAEUC.org 2008). This is worsened by a provision stating that the Council shall act in the negotiations and conclusions of the international trade agreements by the qualified majority only instead of requiring unanimity according to article 188c.4 (CAEUC.org 2008). The ratification of Lisbon Treaty will open the door for the encroachment of the internal laws of the nations involved. For instance, the big number of unemployment in Eastern Europe can be utilized in western part of Europe to constitute cheap labour, thus undermining the existing minimum labour standards such as minimum wage and conditions. The recent Vaxholm case presents an unfavorable precedent wherein a Latvian company operating in Sweden was allowed by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to employ Latvian workers instead of Swedish workers while imposing payments and conditions contrary to the Swedish internal labour laws (CAEUC.org 2008). In another notable case of the Viking ferry, it has been ruled that the Finnish seafarers union could strike against a Finnish ferry company utilizing Estonian sailors at Estonian wage rates on its ferries as long as it would not hinder the company from putting up a branch of its company in Estonia. Such unfavorable jurisprudence is feared to be enforced upon the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty. Apparently, it will be a great disadvantage on the part of Ireland since Irish people are earnestly protecting their democracy and refuse to be governed by unfair external laws and court decisions (CAEUC.org 2008). About 150 million unemployed people are living in regions of EU and poverty is much worse than the EU average. The de-industrialisation of eastern European states was caused by competition policy when they joined up where salaries are a fraction of the rates in the west. According to the EU Cohesion this will take generations to change. Under EU law, no government can put up state-owned enterprises, subsidise private ones or defend native industries against imports (CAEUC.org 2008). In the process, cheap labor which will challenge existing pay and conditions will become more rampant. The forced competition between workers also takes place between states competing for inward investment. There are already closures and relocations of factories from Ireland to cheap labour regions within the EU and beyond. The loss of industrial jobs made the present loss of construction jobs worse. Competing to give bigger funding, tax breaks or cheap labour simply lets multinational companies play off one state against another (CAEUC.org 2008). Moreover, the Lisbon Treaty encourages people from the wealthier regions to compete with the poor and unemployed people from the poorer regions . This is made more possible as the EU and the European Economic Community are trying to create situations that will facilitate big businesses to run in free and unrestricted Europe-wide market (CAEUC.org 2008). The aim of the EU policy is to have an open market economy with open competition. The internal market includes a system guarantees that competition is not distorted because competition is considered as one of EU’s organizing standard and the basis for all other policies (CAEUC.org 2008). Through the Lisbon Treaty, the EU will have the exclusive power in some critical areas like International Trade and Foreign Direct Investment. This indicates that European Union will have the sole prerogative in using the tools used by the IDA in successfully attracting thousands of jobs to Ireland and the Irish government does not share the same right to use the same tools (Green 2008). Even the tax policies of Ireland and other key economic interests will then be subject to interference should the Treaty of Lisbon is upheld (Green 2008). This is evidenced by article 113 of the Treaty of Lisbon wherein there is a specific provision requiring the European Council to act to prevent “distortion of competition” due to indirect taxes. This can be done by implementing a consolidated tax base which apparently will favor only countries such as France whose Finance Minister was boasting beforehand about it but was told to shut up until the treaty was finally ratified (Green 2008). The objective of most of the European governments is to commercialise public services forcing the commission state providers to compete with private sectors in providing public services. The European Services Forum works for this in Brussels because there are huge revenues to be made (CAEUC.org 2008). Most services can now be regarded as economic activities that are suitable for privatization as a clear opinion of the Commission. Further, the Lisbon Treaty is also said to be geared for the privatization of the health service, making equal access to such service becoming more difficult to achieve especially for those who rely on the public system (CAEUC.org 2008). According to Barry Finnegan the trade in services including health and education will be opened up for privatization in Lisbon Treaty (source 8a) after transforming water and sanitation, public transport, energy, post and telecoms services as private business during the 1980s(CAEUC.org 2008). Now, it becomes crucial because health, education and social services have been protected from privatization and changing the provisions and policies related thereto will be much easier should the Treaty of Lisbon take effect since it will only require Qualified Majority Voting instead of the much harder unanimous decision (Liz 2008) and (CAEUC.org 2008). Unless it could show in advance that it will be threatened seriously and will disturb the national organization of such service, a government could not veto a deal (CAEUC.org 2008). The European Court of Justice rulings upheld such set-up because this is a treaty policy. The problem here is that the removal of the power to veto aspects related to health, education and social services will allow the commission to open them to the international corporations (CAEUC.org 2008). Because of the changes in voting, it is now easier for the commission to favour privatization. Such policies are made to be consistent in their objective to implement measures of liberalization. In doing so, the regulations on who can provide goods and services are eliminated. The EU trade policy all countries to be involved in the world economy. This includes the improved eradication of restrictions on the international trade. The new treaty also intends to guarantee the functioning of the energy market which means privatizing electricity enterprises. In Ireland this only means that price rises to lure private sectors from participating thereto (CAEUC.org 2008). Conclusion Most of the Europeans think that the EU does not operate in the best interests of its people (Whitney 2008). The basic constitutional provisions of the Lisbon Treaty are hidden in scattered fragments of multifaceted and renumbered amendments. It is inexplicable, unreadable and too compound constitution to read within a reasonable time frame. It is against the fundamental common sense and against the sense of responsibility to sign any contract without studying and understanding its consequences. This is very important in the case of making a decision concerning a new constitution. It will ultimately conclude our and our children’s future with implication affecting all the related part of our life. (Holby 2008). According to Deirdre De Burca the Treaty is flawed and there are portions that are not reasonable including the trade provisions and the encouragement of militarization but contrary to that she thinks the Treaty to be in the national interest. She acknowledged the losing of a veto on services except where a country can verify that the competition would strictly disrupt its operation. The people are asking of why the entire political establishment is in desperate to see a Yes vote. Why is it that only the same extreme groups like Sinn Fein pushing a no vote publicly? Why are they anxious of a real, open and objective debate? A famous Irishman once said that A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and deceit in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. (Green 2008) The question is are they trying to hide something? Maybe Valery Giscard d’Estaing, the author of Lisbon treaty, can give us a hint. He said that public opinion will be led to adopt the proposals that we are not present to them directly. All the earlier proposals will be in the new text but will still be hidden and disguised in some way(Green 2008). Now every Irish has the responsibility to discuss to argue about these issues and to inform the people around us. The ignorance of one voter impairs the security of all in a democracy (Green 2008). Let us all be like John Fitzgerald Kennedy who did not shrink from this responsibility of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger (Green 2008). The EUs competition and liberalisation gives way for a race to the bottom. Considering all the grounds obtained showing the negative implications of the “liberalization” plot of the subject treaty, it can be concluded that the liberalization indeed presents many disadvantages for the Irish people. That is why when the people of Ireland vote on this treaty, they vote not just for themselves but also for other people in Europe who deprived a vote for future generations, their lives will be affected. The primary step to a choice is to reject the Lisbon Treaty (CAEUC.org 2008). References CAEUC.org 2008, Big Business Before People, Campaign against the EU Constitution: Vote no to Lisbon Treaty. Available from: http://www.caeuc.org/index.php?q=node/8 [Accessed 8 June 2009]. CAEUC.org 2008, Charter of Conditional Rights, Campaign against the EU Constitution: Vote no to Lisbon Treaty. Available from: http://www.caeuc.org/index.php?q=node/10 [Accessed 8 June 2009]. CAEUC.org 2008, Democracy Undermined, Campaign against the EU Constitution: Vote no to Lisbon Treaty. Available from: http://www.caeuc.org/index.php?q=node/9 [Accessed 8 June 2009]. CAEUC.org 2008, Environmental Protection, Campaign against the EU Constitution: Vote no to Lisbon Treaty. Available from: http://www.caeuc.org/index.php?q=node/12 [Accessed 8 June 2009]. CAEUC.org 2008, Militarism and the EU, Campaign against the EU Constitution: Vote no to Lisbon Treaty. Available from: http://www.caeuc.org/index.php?q=node/7 [Accessed 8 June 2009]. CAEUC.org 2008, Trade Justice, Campaign against the EU Constitution: Vote no to Lisbon Treaty. Available from: http://www.caeuc.org/index.php?q=node/11 [Accessed 8 June 2009]. EEPA 2008, The Lisbon Treaty, Available from: http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=699&Itemid=112 Green, S. 2008, Lisbon Treaty – Irish Referendum – End of Nations. 8 May 2008. Steve Green’s Daily Referendum. Available from: http://dailyreferendum.blogspot.com/2008/05/lisbon-treaty-irish-referendum-end-of.html [Accessed 8 June 2009] Holby, H 2008, ‘Top Reasons to Vote NO to Lisbon Treaty’, Indymedia ireland, 13 May. Available from: http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87518 [Accessed 8 June 2009] Liz, C 2008, Lisbon Treaty – Aid and Trade, Indymedia Ireland. Available from: http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87310 [Accessed 8 May 2009] National Forum on Europe. 2009, The Treaty of Lisbon. Available from: http://www.forumoneurope.ie/eng/index.asp?locID=442&docID=-1 [ 8 June 2009] The Lisbon Treaty, 2008, Get the complete picture: Introduction to the Lisbon Treaty 2008. Available from: http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=699&Itemid=112 [Accessed 8 June 2009]. – source 7 (The Lisbon Treaty 2008) Valla, M 2008, ‘What is the Treaty of Lisbon Anyway?’, France 24, 29 June. Available from: http://www.france24.com/en/20080629-nice-lisbon-eight-years-reforming-union-eu-treaties-ratification [Accessed 8 June 2009] – source 10 Whitney, M 2008, Another blow to the New World Order: The Irish people have spoken; Lisbon is dead, CongressCheck.com. Available from: http://www.congresscheck.com/tag/lisbon-treaty/ [Accessed 8 June 2009]. - source 9 (Whitney 2008) Read More