Vaclav Klaus: 'Too late' to stop Lisbon Treaty, concedes last EU leader left to sign

[-:Undertaker:-]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1221079/Vaclav-Klaus-Too-late-stop-Lisbon-Treaty-concedes-EU-leader-left-sign.html


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/10/17/article-0-0359989E0000044D-745_468x348.jpg
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/10/17/article-0-027C0515000004B0-667_468x297.jpg

The only EU leader who has not yet signed the Lisbon reform treaty has conceded he will not be able to derail it. Czech President Vaclav Klaus's admission has paved the way for the document to become law.

The treaty has already been signed by the leaders of the other 26 EU states but had been put in doubt by Mr Klaus's last-minute objection over World War Two property claims. Some had speculated he wanted to delay signing until after a general election in Britain, in the hope the Conservatives would be victorious and call a referendum.

Mr Klaus said: 'I will not and cannot wait for the British election. They would have to hold it in the coming days or weeks.' He had demanded an opt-out to shield his country from property claims by Germans expelled after the war. The new hurdle raised concern it could require new talks and another agreement by all EU members, threatening to undo years of diplomatic work to create an acceptable treaty.

But eurosceptic Mr Klaus, an admirer of Margaret Thatcher, told newspaper Lidove Noviny that despite his opposition to the charter, it had gone too far for him to stop it. He said: 'I do not consider the Lisbon Treaty to be a good thing for Europe, for the freedom of Europe, or for the Czech Republic. 'However, the train has already travelled so fast and so far that I guess it will not be possible to stop it or turn it around, however much we would wish to.'

I wonder with what the European Union have threatend the Czech Republic with, so the question now rests with David Cameron, will he let the British people have a say on the formation of the European Superstate which already makes over 75% of British laws, or will he shy away from the issue?

Here we come President Blair.

[alexxxxx]

well he's under pressure because the democratically elected czech government want to push it through but the president wont sign. he couldn't hold out for months.

[-:Undertaker:-]

well he's under pressure because the democratically elected czech government want to push it through but the president wont sign. he couldn't hold out for months.

The Czech government and the European Union want it pushed through because a democratic vote was awaiting in the United Kingdom, and a democratic vote on the Lisbon Treaty is the last thing the European Union want.

[alexxxxx]

The Czech government and the European Union want it pushed through because a democratic vote was awaiting in the United Kingdom, and a democratic vote on the Lisbon Treaty is the last thing the European Union want.

so, you have something against the democratically-elected government of the Czech people wanting to push through a treaty when one man (who was elected by the parliament, not the people, but only just) wants to stop it in its way? ok.

[-:Undertaker:-]

so, you have something against the democratically-elected government of the Czech people wanting to push through a treaty when one man (who was elected by the parliament, not the people, but only just) wants to stop it in its way? ok.

Infact from what I have read, the Czech President Mr Klaus has the support of the people of the Czech Republic on holding out demanding the footnote be added to the treaty, remember the Czech people were the people who afterall we sold out to the Third Reich and later the USSR.

..besides, I am in the United Kingdom and not the Czech Republic, so if anything it shouldn't be the Czech President defending British sovereignty it should be our own Prime Minister who did promise a referendum in 2005 but went back on that promise.

Napolean failed.
Hitler failed.
Stalin failed.
Blair won.

[Jordy]

Infact from what I have read, the Czech President Mr Klaus has the support of the people of the Czech Republic on holding out demanding the footnote be added to the treaty, remember the Czech people were the people who afterall we sold out to the Third Reich and later the USSR.

..besides, I am in the United Kingdom and not the Czech Republic, so if anything it shouldn't be the Czech President defending British sovereignty it should be our own Prime Minister who did promise a referendum in 2005 but went back on that promise.

Napolean failed.
Hitler failed.
Stalin failed.
Blair won.Napoleon, Hitler, Stalin - Brutal Dictators...
Blair - Elected by 27 Democratically Elected Governments

[alexxxxx]

The parliament represents the people and they want to push it through. to support an undemocratic process in order to, in your opinion, stop an undemocratic process in Europe, pushed through by democratically elected officials, is in my eyes incredibly hypocritical.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Napoleon, Hitler, Stalin - Dictators...
Blair - Elected by 27 Democratically Elected Governments

Josef Stalin was elected by the Communist Party leadership, and the same with Hitler with the Nazi leadership. I admit the EU does not send millions to their deaths, but I am talking about democracy and the same governmental system that is being ushered in on us.


The parliament represents the people and they want to push it through. to support an undemocratic process in order to, in your opinion, stop an undemocratic process in Europe, pushed through by democratically elected officials, is in my eyes incredibly hypocritical.

The people are behind President Klaus, if you are so much of a supporter of democracy then why do you seem to think the British people do not deserve a vote on EU membership or the Lisbon Treaty?

[alexxxxx]

because i respect parliament. parliament represents the people and is the voice of them. referenda destroys the integrity of parliament. why should we have referenda on one treaty and not another? we might as well not bother with one.

[-:Undertaker:-]

because i respect parliament. parliament represents the people and is the voice of them. referenda destroys the integrity of parliament. why should we have referenda on one treaty and not another? we might as well not bother with one.

..maybe because its such an important treaty on an insitution that creates over 75% of our laws, and maybe because referendums reflect public view more, meaning that when political parties make promises then back-track on them (as Labour have done on their promise in 2005) then we can still have our say on it.

If you do not agree on a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, you must surely support a referendum on EU membership?

[alexxxxx]

If you do not agree on a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, you must surely support a referendum on EU membership?

no. for the same reason.

[-:Undertaker:-]

no. for the same reason.

The only reason you do not support a referendum on it is because you know it would lose, you have in the past used the 1970s' vote on the EEC to try and back your case up, but that was ruined by the simple fact we voted for the EEC and not the European Union.

You know it would lose.

[Fez]

My guess: Cameron puts forward a referendum as a promise during his general election campaign, gets in office, puts one in, world is saved.

[alexxxxx]

The only reason you do not support a referendum on it is because you know it would lose, you have in the past used the 1970s' vote on the EEC to try and back your case up, but that was ruined by the simple fact we voted for the EEC and not the European Union.

You know it would lose.

it's possible it might lose. but the people who make the laws in this country, sign the treaties are in PARLIAMENT which is the right and proper way for it to be done so. Almost all laws have been passed in parliament for hundreds of years and I don't think it is the right path for us to change it now. Parliament is elected, therefore you should vote for someone that will represent you. That's how it works. Referenda destroys and dilutes our parliament's integrity. You could say that the death penalty has large support, illegal downloading of music has widespread support but it is for parliament to weigh up the pros and cons not for a referendum. Unpopular ideas aren't always bad ones.

Pulling out of the EU would destroy our economy, investment would drop, employment would drop. Pulling out of the EU would be the STUPIDEST thing to do when we are tightly integrated at the moment. If parliament votes to do that, we'd have to accept it, but it would be incredibly stupid.

[-:Undertaker:-]

it's possible it might lose. but the people who make the laws in this country, sign the treaties are in PARLIAMENT which is the right and proper way for it to be done so. Almost all laws have been passed in parliament for hundreds of years and I don't think it is the right path for us to change it now. Parliament is elected, therefore you should vote for someone that will represent you. That's how it works. Referenda destroys and dilutes our parliament's integrity. You could say that the death penalty has large support, illegal downloading of music has widespread support but it is for parliament to weigh up the pros and cons not for a referendum. Unpopular ideas aren't always bad ones.

Pulling out of the EU would destroy our economy, investment would drop, employment would drop. Pulling out of the EU would be the STUPIDEST thing to do when we are tightly integrated at the moment. If parliament votes to do that, we'd have to accept it, but it would be incredibly stupid.

I do not think you have read what I have said before and what I said before earlier in the thread, the European Union makes over 75% of British laws - that is far more important than illegal downloading or any other petty example you can come up with, so a referendum is right to be held.

I am afraid pulling out of the European Union would not wreck our economy, again eurocrats using the same old scare tactics to frighten people into accepting a political, economic and social union. When the United Kingdom signed up to the EEC, overnight thousands, if not millions of jobs were lost as industries such as farming opened upto cheaper competitors across europe, making the farms worthless overnight. The farmers and fishermen across Europe are not happy with the regulations and limits the EU imposes on them and the damage the EU does to French fishing and British fishing. On the other hand business also does not like the idea of regulation after regulation as that costs them money, and limits competitiveness.

The rest of the world is not in the European Union, and a lot of European countrys are not in the European Union so i'm sorry, absolute rubbish.

[Bun]

YES BOIZZZ@!@!

Edited by Robbie! (Forum Super Moderator): Please do not pointlessly

[alexxxxx]

I do not think you have read what I have said before and what I said before earlier in the thread, the European Union makes over 75% of British laws - that is far more important than illegal downloading or any other petty example you can come up with, so a referendum is right to be held.

These examples probably have the support of comparably similar number of people. They probably deem this to be important as much as the lisbon treaty, which in effect, doesn't pool more sovereignty at all. Why should YOUR issue be more important than others because YOU say so?



I am afraid pulling out of the European Union would not wreck our economy, again eurocrats using the same old scare tactics to frighten people into accepting a political, economic and social union. When the United Kingdom signed up to the EEC, overnight thousands, if not millions of jobs were lost as industries such as farming opened upto cheaper competitors across europe, making the farms worthless overnight. The farmers and fishermen across Europe are not happy with the regulations and limits the EU imposes on them and the damage the EU does to French fishing and British fishing. On the other hand business also does not like the idea of regulation after regulation as that costs them money, and limits competitiveness.

Farmers may not be happy with the limits they are given to grow because if they were allowed to grow more they would earn more. However, if everyone did the same, the price of their crops would drop alot lot more, meaning farmers go out of business and price stability of food (probably the most vital product we buy) fluctuates at a stupid level causing chaos. If the uncertainty of britain in the single market arises, potential investment (which has no borders, you can get a visa almost anywhere if you invest) falls, as it's not certain where or how wares will be sold. The single market now means we can specialise in what we do best, why should we have to produce something and sell it at a high expense when we could import it for cheaper? Why should growth in one sector be cut because of the inability to grow into other markets? At least 3 million jobs are estimated to be here because of our involvement of the EU. Investors like the EU because it guarantees their goods right of passage in the biggest economic area in the world.


The rest of the world is not in the European Union, and a lot of European countrys are not in the European Union so i'm sorry, absolute rubbish.
*countries. Our integration and reliance on the EU (60% of our trade is with the union only 20 miles across the sea) means that essentially, if we aren't part of the EU we will be losing out as they will be free to implement any one-sided trade agreements or other treaties with us held to ransom.

However, this story isn't being widely reported so I'm not sure of the legitimacy of it. He was quoted in saying:



Oct. 17 (Bloomberg) -- Czech President Vaclav Klaus, the last European Union leader yet to sign the Lisbon treaty, said the “train carrying the treaty is going so fast and it’s so far that it can’t be stopped or returned, no matter how much some of us would want that,” Agence France-Presse reported.

Klaus said he still did not see the treaty as a good thing for “freedom in Europe,” AFP cited comments attributed to Klaus in the Lidove noviny daily.


I think the mail might be over-reporting this into something that he hasn't said at all.

[-:Undertaker:-]

These examples probably have the support of comparably similar number of people. They probably deem this to be important as much as the lisbon treaty, which in effect, doesn't pool more sovereignty at all. Why should YOUR issue be more important than others because YOU say so?

Farmers may not be happy with the limits they are given to grow because if they were allowed to grow more they would earn more. However, if everyone did the same, the price of their crops would drop alot lot more, meaning farmers go out of business and price stability of food (probably the most vital product we buy) fluctuates at a stupid level causing chaos. If the uncertainty of britain in the single market arises, potential investment (which has no borders, you can get a visa almost anywhere if you invest) falls, as it's not certain where or how wares will be sold. The single market now means we can specialise in what we do best, why should we have to produce something and sell it at a high expense when we could import it for cheaper? Why should growth in one sector be cut because of the inability to grow into other markets? At least 3 million jobs are estimated to be here because of our involvement of the EU. Investors like the EU because it guarantees their goods right of passage in the biggest economic area in the world.

*countries. Our integration and reliance on the EU (60% of our trade is with the union only 20 miles across the sea) means that essentially, if we aren't part of the EU we will be losing out as they will be free to implement any one-sided trade agreements or other treaties with us held to ransom.

However, this story isn't being widely reported so I'm not sure of the legitimacy of it. He was quoted in saying:

I think the mail might be over-reporting this into something that he hasn't said at all.

I'm sorry, but if you think that illegal downloading is more important than over 75% of our laws being made by another organisation than Parliament then you have a serious lack of common sense and you are determined to avoid the issue. I'm sure anybody, even nerds, would agree that where over 75% of our laws are made is a far more important issue than the topic of illegal downloading, something which the EU probably makes the regulations over anyway.

The farming prices were fine before we joined the EEC, that is why thousands of farms over the country closed overnight as cheaper rivals from across europe destroyed them and made them worthless overnight, and that is why we see fields across the United Kingdom to this very day, standing empty and overgrown while we are now at the mercy of imports and price changes abroad.

I am sorry but I do not accept that three million jobs rely on the European Union, yet again this is an attempt to scare people on the issue. I have said it before, you do not need to be in the European Union to be invested in, infact not being in the European Union and having a free independant market would attract business, as shown in the 1980s'.

If they are prepared to hold us to ransom on trade issues then so be it; it just shows how close they really are to us and what they really think of us despite accepting billions in British taxypayer money every year, however I find that highly unlikely as the rest of the world and other european countries trade perfectly fine without being in the European Union. We do not need it, we have never needed it. We can be friends with Europe, we do not have to be intergrated into it, just as we haven't through history, before the invention of super-ships, planes the channel tunnel and other methods of importing/exporting.

On the issue of the Daily Mail, while it may not always report the truth (as with all newspapers and media) the sad fact is that I would believe it anyday over this government, and especially over when disgraced, unelected, unwanted, socialist failures end up in the European Union telling me it is a good thing to be in the European Union.