Irish "no" puts Malta's sixth EP seat in jeopardy
The Irish referendum rejection of the Lisbon reform treaty had put the sixth seat allocated for Malta in the European Parliament in jeopardy, Foreign Minister Tonio Borg told timesofmalta.com this afternoon.
He said the outcome of the referendum was "extremely disappointing", especially since the reform treaty had been ratified by most of the EU member states and was in the process of being ratified by the rest.
"The more vociferous 'no' vote has won because of the low turnout," Dr Borg said.
He said the situation will now be discussed at a General Affairs Council meeting, which he will attend on Monday, following by the EU summit a few days later. However the EU has already said there is no Plan B for such a situation.
One of the gains for Malta in the Lisbon reform treaty was the allocation of a sixth seat in the European Parliament as from the next EP elections.
But Dr Borg said that unless the new impasse was resolved in about six months, this was unlikely to happen.
European Parliament elections are to be held in the middle of next year.
The Irish government earlier today acknowledged that the "no" vote had won the referendum, held yesterday, potentially scuppering EU reform plans.
Justice Minister Dermot Ahern conceded the vote shortly after noon as tallies from around the country showed the treaty had been defeated in an overwhelming number of constituencies.
"It looks like this will be a 'No' vote," Ahern told RTE television. "At the end of the day for a myriad of reasons the people have spoken."
Ireland is one of the most pro-European countries in the bloc and the only one to entrust its voters with a referendum on the treaty, which replaces an EU constitution rejected by Dutch and French voters in 2005.
RTE said tallies showed the treaty would be carried only in a handful of constituencies, mainly in the capital Dublin.
The victory for the "No" camp means a country with fewer than 1 percent of the EU's 490 million population could wreck a treaty painstakingly negotiated over years by leaders of all 27 member states.
"If the Irish people decide to reject the treaty of Lisbon, naturally, there will be no treaty of Lisbon," French Prime Minister Francois Fillon said late on Thursday.
However, other French officials have said work on the treaty could continue. France assumes the rotating EU presidency in a matter of weeks and was supposed to be in charge of setting up the new system which would take effect at the start of the year.
The treaty, intended to make the EU stronger and more effective, had the backing of the three main political parties in Ireland, which has prospered under EU membership. Farmers groups, businesses and many labour unions also backed it.
On polling day bookmakers were still taking bets giving it overwhelming odds to pass.
But while the country ranks in surveys as one of the EU's most pro-European states, opponents say the treaty reduces small countries' clout and gives Brussels new foreign and defence policy powers that undermine Ireland's historic neutrality.
It wasn't the first time Irish voters have shocked the EU. They almost wrecked the bloc's plans for eastward expansion in 2001 by rejecting the Nice treaty, but the government staged a second referendum in which that pact passed.
The government has said it is not considering a re-run this time around.
The Lisbon treaty envisages a long-term president of the European Council of EU leaders, a stronger foreign policy chief and a mutual defence pact. One of its main benefits for Malta is a sixth seat in the European Parliament.
Fourteen countries have already ratified the treaty in their national parliaments, including Malta..
EU leaders meeting in Brussels next week are expected to reaffirm their commitment to it and may ask Ireland to indicate how it intends to proceed.
That would put the onus on Dublin either to seek changes, opt-outs or assurances and put them to a second referendum, or to find a way to allow the others to proceed with the key reforms without Ireland.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
Updated: Shot migrant in critical...
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
Yana Mintoff: Family speaking to...
Petrol price up 6c
In Discussion
22 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Ramon Casha
Jun 14th 2008, 06:47
The best way to deal with this should have been twofold: A referendum held all across the EU, and letting people decide on different aspects of it individually. I'm quite sure that there were elements of this treaty which would have met with approval by all, such as concerning human rights. I also doubt that anyone in the EU would have any objections to Malta getting a 6th seat.
This would ensure that (a) the citizens of the EU are better informed about what the treaty contains, and (b) If there's a particular area of the treaty which people don't like, it doesn't mean the entire treaty has to be scuttled.
John Spiteri
Jun 13th 2008, 23:05
What an embarrassment to have Tonio Borg speak on your behalf. As if the Lisbon Treaty was about Malta's sixth seat!!!! pathetic - of all the comments that i have read about the irish referendum this is the the worst statement i have read. Even Barroso undere severe pressure managed to gather some respect. Oh God, please, honestly we deserve better!
John Spiteri
Jun 13th 2008, 22:59
To Keith Chicop:
where did the other 26 indegenous people of Europe get to have a say?
We in Malta spent a whole week debating our President's forced and non consequential speech on the opening of parliament yet decided on the LISBON treaty within the awesome time of an afternnon.
All those who speak in favour of Lisbon, I am convinced have NOT attempted to read it. For those who have it is unitelligible, an since when are reasonable men expected to accept unintelligible things?
The Lisbon Treaty for those who bothered to actually decypher it, laid down the foundations for a Super State called the EU - the Irish were right to reject it whilst we worry about a sixth seat in a superflous parliament without any power.
Alfred Farrugia
Jun 13th 2008, 21:10
With practically all the European countries as members of the EU, Malta stands a better chance of making progress as an EU member than if it remained out. That does not mean that the EU is perfect, and our representatives at the EU need to examine every cost and every benefit, and try to get some compensation for the first and optimize the second.
At the University of Sussex I was taught that one of the strongest points of the EU was its flexibility. The failed proposed Constitution and the draft Lisbon Treaty drive the EU towards more rigidity. The Irish “No” could be a blessing in disguise. Why did we not have a public discussion on this important Treaty? There is a silver lining. Draft Article 35 on “Voluntary Withdrawal from the Union” is not longer on the table, although at some point in time it will find its way in.
Malta should join Ireland and other small neutral EU member States and seek to find common ground on matters of principles and substance that should not be traded for small procedural gains. Our EU representatives should introduce discussions in Malta on all new EU initiatives.
Kamal Awad
Jun 13th 2008, 20:42
IRE - LAND
A NO vote means:
Throwing the European Union into turmoil, leaving it bogged down by cumbersome procedures, steadily becoming less able to react to global pressures, losing influence and opportunity.
Many European Governments elsewhere (including Malta) - whose peoples might reasonably have expected a referendum - have deliberately engineered to avoid one, believing that the people would vote this treaty down as the French and Dutch did in 2005. No broad consensus, then, in those countries either. This means the Democracy deficit is getting deeper.
Malta having or losing an extra MEP seat dose not actually counts. Crucial EU decisions require SOFAS NOT SEATS
Rebecca Sultana
Jun 13th 2008, 20:07
Well done Ireland!! Someone has to put a stop to the increasing lack of democracy being practised...
André Xuereb
Jun 13th 2008, 20:06
Ms Carbonaro might want to explain (i) on what she bases her argument that "the eu is only good for the people who works there" (sic!), and (ii) what people like me, whose studies abroad are only possible because Malta is now an EU country (well, I could pay for my PhD, but I'd rather be paid...), and there are lots of us. And please don't tell me that I am being selfish here. Anyone worth his salt would realise that an increasing amount of people pursuing further studies are essential to any modern country.
George Cremona
Jun 13th 2008, 19:17
Effie Carbonaro had asked the Maltese to state if we are better as EU members than before. Is he happy with his new leader? Does he take his leader's word seriously because it was his leader Dr. Joseph Muscat himself who has recently publicly confessed how mistaken was he and the MLP in their campaigning against Malta' s EU membership.
Louis Grech
Jun 13th 2008, 19:05
So What! (L Grech M'Xlokk)
Adrian Camilleri
Jun 13th 2008, 17:00
Quote:
"The more vociferous 'no' vote has won because of the low turnout," Dr Borg said.
Dr. Borg, your party won an Election because of that and with a relative majority.
As long as any treaty goes for a referendum in ANY country, we will still have the same thing like it happened today in Ireland.
"At the end of the day for a myriad of reasons the people have spoken."
nicholas saliba
Jun 13th 2008, 16:49
thank God for that. i thought that no one was going to stop the eurocrats.
long live our sovranity. Malta still has a voice with a veto.
effie carbonaro
Jun 13th 2008, 16:33
people are seeing that the eu is only good for the people who works there.since joining the eu the maltese family has only seen hardship and more hardship.may i ask one simple question to all.now that we are in the eu are we better then when we wernt in the eu?i will leave to the maltese peolpe to answer.
Charles Camilleri
Jun 13th 2008, 16:03
Had the Treaty been put to a popular vote in other EU countries i am sure we would have had the same result. Most Europeans reject the idea of Brussels calling the tune. This, EU countries ' Governments are aware of, so they preferred to pass the Treaty through their Parliaments than risk being rejected in a referendum.
Philip Micallef
Jun 13th 2008, 15:53
The EU has expanded too quickly without first consolidating its base. Imagine the nightmare,if ever Turkey were to be accepted as a member. The time has arrived for hard decisions to be taken regarding the Twin Track proposition.
Kevin Zammit
Jun 13th 2008, 15:44
Since when did Ireland enjoy 'historic neutrality'? It's neutrality is as historic as Austria's is ...
Miguel Fenech
Jun 13th 2008, 15:28
The Lisbon Treaty surely has its merits and benefits. However, why can't Malta show the same guts as Ireland or the Netherlands and France a couple of years ago when it comes to our own national interests?
Silvan Said
Jun 13th 2008, 15:03
I wish my government gave me the same right as Irish citizens to have my say. While the Irish public has been wise to see this treaty as a step backwards for small countries in the EU, the Maltese Government was ready to trade the current status quo where small countries have equal power with large countries for an insignificant 6th seat in the powerless EU parliament.
Malcolm Seychell
Jun 13th 2008, 15:01
A referendum should be done in every country.
The treaty means more power to brussels, something which the majority of people do not want.
Malta will lose the power we have with our Veto at the moment apart from other things.
Roderick Marmara
Jun 13th 2008, 14:57
Thanks Ireland.
John Spiteri
Jun 13th 2008, 14:50
Congratulations to the Irish, for this unequivocal rejection of a previously rejected constitution. If the Times and all the other mainstream media want to know how the rest of the European populations really feel about this decision, it should stop echoing the spin and recriminations of self serving bureaucrats and politicians and demand a referendum in each country for a change. Yes to an open Europe, No to a Federal Super State.
David Newson
Jun 13th 2008, 14:22
thank God for the Irish.
The few Countries that had a referendum have all voted a resounding 'No'. This treaty if ever passed will be against the wishes of the majority of the people of Europe.Slowly.slowly,by stealth we are being forced by big business into the United States of Europe regardless of the fact that all we really have in common is that we happen to live in the same corner of the World.
When I first voted 'Yes' all those years ago in England,it was for the EEC (European Economic Community) not for the EU. We were tricked then and are still being conned now.
It is ridiculous to think that twenty seven different countries with nearly the same amount of languages,each with their own different culture and ideas can be united in one 'Big Nation.
The idea of a Nation State in itself is against natural law and the time will come when even this will fragment never mind a United States of Europe .
Keith Chircop
Jun 13th 2008, 14:09
"The victory for the "No" camp means a country with fewer than 1 percent of the EU's 490 million population could wreck a treaty painstakingly negotiated over years by leaders of all 27 member states."
A painstakingly negotiated treaty that throws democracy out the window.