Libertas: Are they to be taken seriously?

Steviemak

From http://grahnlaw.blogspot.com/2009/05/european-elections-libertas-principles.html just in case people can't access

European elections: Libertas’ principles ─ what do they mean?
We are some 31 days from the start of the European elections. A few moments ago, the policies page of Libertas.eu still told us that:

“The Libertas programme for a better Europe will be published on this site in the coming weeks.”



***

First principle

The problem is that a simplistic slogan is actually much harder to understand than a detailed explanation, because it raises a number of questions: What do they mean by that? How are they going to achieve it? What are the consequences?

If Libertas is serious about its politics, it should start detailing its policies and their consequences immediately.

In the meanwhile, without a proper Libertas programme, we will have to make do with what is on offer.

Libertas tells us that it is committed to five core principles. We take one at a time, and try to figure out what they mean.

We start with the first one.


***

Hold the EU accountable: Only elected politicians should make the law, says Libertas.

Is Libertas smashing through an open door?

Council?

The supreme law-making body of the European Union is the Council, where the ministers of the EU member states approve the directives and regulations.

Most people would accept the ministers as elected politicians, although their mandate is national.

Is this the problem for Libertas? Should national level politicians be disqualified from EU level decisions?

If Libertas wants to abolish the Council, it should say so. Likewise, if it wants to turn the Council into a second chamber (Senate) of the European Parliament, with directly elected Senators.

**

European Parliament?

The slogan can hardly be directed against the directly elected European Parliament, which participates in many areas of EU legislation. The EP’s participation would increase and develop under the Treaty of Lisbon, so representative democracy at EU level improves during the next parliamentary term, if the treaty enters into force.

Presumably Libertas means to improve representative democracy further by its legislative action within the EP, since it is standing in the elections to the European Parliament.

**

Commission?

The rallying cry can hardly target the Commission, either. The Commission drafts legislative proposals, which are adopted by the Council and often the European Parliament.

I find it hard to believe that Libertas would want to ban the strictly limited cases of delegated legislation by the Commission. Any national or European political system would choke, if the daily fluctuating import values of vegetables or the latest food additive or other details of implementation would have to go the full parliamentary route.

Is Libertas against the Commission’s power to propose legal acts? If that is the case, why not say so?

The rationale for the Commission’s right of proposal is its task to look after the general interest. If Libertas wants to weaken the general interest, which interests does it want to strengthen?


***


National parliaments

National parliaments already make the domestic laws, so the aim of Libertas’ slogan has to be something else. And why should Libertas speak about domestic law-making in a campaign for the European Parliament?

***

Perplexing

As we see, the meaning and the implications of Libertas’ first core principle are far from clear. Honestly, I don’t know what to make of it.

If Libertas wants to maintain what we already have, why launch it as a battle cry, as the first principle of its campaign?

If they want something different, why not tell voters what it is and why it is important?

What do we vote for, if we cast our ballot for a Libertas candidate?

Libertas’ first principle leaves us hanging in suspense.

P. Breathnach

From Libertas's own website (and referred to in the Grahnlaw Blog cited above):

Policies
The Libertas programme for a better Europe will be published on this site in the coming weeks.

[See http://www.libertas.eu/en/policies ]

The five "principles" are:
- Hold the EU accountable
- Full disclosure
- Save money
- Have your say
- A lean EU

These are slogans, nothing more. They tell us nothing about where Libertas stand on economics, society, international relations, trade, consumer issues, and other questions that might interest me. The impression I get is that all they want is to cut things down.

Hitman Actual

P. Breathnach wrote: »

It's on now, and has been on for what feels like forever. I still have no problem with putting Ganley way down on my ballot, but I am finding it difficult to identify candidates that I want to vote for. It will come down to "least worst".

Libertas is a policy-free organisation, running on slogans.

Marian Harkin seems the most impressive to me so far, both in this program and on TV3 last night (apart from the scary hand-waving thing! )

Interesting reaction to Ganley there today. One woman said that he "scared her", another person said that the whole debate was "a Punch and Judy show led by Declan Ganley", and I lol'd at the laughs from the crowd when he said his spending so far was only €70K. On this latter point, there's no way he'll ever have any credibilty over funding, even if SIPO were to acknowledge that the spending in the Lisbon referendum was above aboard (highly unlikely, I know). In general terms, nobody will ever trust him or Libertas, so as of now, I really don't see how he will be elected.

I notice he has a new catch-phrase as well: "Political Cartels" :rolleyes:. What a tool he really is.

sink

Hitman Actual wrote: »

Marian Harkin seems the most impressive to me so far, both in this program and on TV3 last night (apart from the scary hand-waving thing! )

I agree, she sits with the ALDE grouping which is the closest ideologically to my own position. It's the third largest grouping in the parliament but she is the only candidate in the whole country aligned with it that I'm aware of.

P. Breathnach

Not sure whether to add this here or on the other thread about Ganley running in my constituency.

I got a mailshot from the Ganley campaign, a postcard-style thing. Two thirds of the space is given to negative campaigning, attacking Fianna Fail and Labour in a general way, and attacking Jim Higgins and Marian Harkin by name.

The alternative he offers is a set of slogans, no real policy, and no specifics on how he might operate.

Scofflaw

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Not sure whether to add this here or on the other thread about Ganley running in my constituency.

I got a mailshot from the Ganley campaign, a postcard-style thing. Two thirds of the space is given to negative campaigning, attacking Fianna Fail and Labour in a general way, and attacking Jim Higgins and Marian Harkin by name.

The alternative he offers is a set of slogans, no real policy, and no specifics on how he might operate.

Hm. Any chance of a scan?

cordially,
Scofflaw

P. Breathnach

Scofflaw wrote: »

Hm. Any chance of a scan?

It's not something I have done before, so I don't know if you will get it. [It seems to have worked.]

Scofflaw

P. Breathnach wrote: »

It's not something I have done before, so I don't know if you will get it. [It seems to have worked.]

Interesting stuff - you're right, it's pure negative campaigning. So Declan will "work to protect Ireland's competitive corporate tax rate"? Hmm, hmm. I wonder if that's what this is all about?

ponderingly,
Scofflaw

BlitzKrieg

Guess they didnt have much to say about labour

eightyfish

Libertas are opposed to gay marriage. Current evidence indicates that gay people are born gay, just as Irish people are born Irish. Ergo, there is no difference between homophobia and racism.

This is really all I need to know to ignore them. The lies over Lisbon and the bully-like attitude of Ganley help, though.

Iwasfrozen

@eightyfish, There is counter-evidence for anything.
I wish for wouldn't derail the topic with your nonsense about Homosexuality.

BlitzKrieg

I hate to keep ths off topic, but eightyfish's evidence an article from New Scientist from 2008 is a much more convincing piece of evidence over a letter to malaysiakini that was written in 2005.

But back on topic, An MEP's power over an issue like gay rights is minimal at best, the issue of gay rights lies firmly with the national government of each state so it shouldnt be an issue in a european election.

But many of the things declan ganley has brought up are not issues for a MEP so it could be seen as fair to throw such issues at him aswell.

Course if he responds that its not a topic for a MEP then one can start listing off the issues he has brought up that are not for MEPs.

eightyfish

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I wish for wouldn't derail the topic with your nonsense about Homosexuality.

Nonsense? This is a thread about whether Libertas should be taken seriously, no?

Kotek Besar

I'll tell you why I can't take this party seriously, after one glance at this page of their website.

Page is entitled "Five Reasons Why the Lisbon Treaty is Bad for Europe". Just looking the last two there:

4. EU law will take primacy over a member state’s law if there is a difference between the two.

This is already the case!

5. You will have a common EU citizenship.

This is already the case!

How anyone could take this party seriously is beyond me. They've laughable.

Iwasfrozen

Nonsense? This is a thread about whether Libertas should be taken seriously, no?

Yes nonsense, your reason not to vote for Libertas is another mans reason to vote for Libertas. You said that Libertas's opposition to Homosexuality was a reason to condone the party, but how many Christain Democrat, Conservative parties exist that preach said message and do quite well in the polls as a result ?

I hate to keep ths off topic, but eightyfish's evidence an article from New Scientist from 2008 is a much more convincing piece of evidence over a letter to malaysiakini that was written in 2005.

It was just an example to prove that the debate on the nature of Homosexuality is still very much ongoing and no one medical research can be set in stone, I could find a better example but I don't feel like trawling through Medical Journals.

eightyfish

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I got a mailshot from the Ganley campaign, a postcard-style thing. Two thirds of the space is given to negative campaigning, attacking Fianna Fail and Labour in a general way, and attacking Jim Higgins and Marian Harkin by name.

The alternative he offers is a set of slogans, no real policy, and no specifics on how he might operate.

It's easy to point our problems, not so easy to fix them. Libertas were a one-issue organisation, a bit like a "no to bin tax" party. Now they're simply pointing out their perceived problems with the EU so that people get annoyed, and then asking for a vote. They have no track record at all. They seem, to me, like they're doing a very good job of taking advantage of a euro-sceptic gap in the market.

eightyfish

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Yes nonsense, your reason not to vote for Libertas is another mans reason to vote for Libertas. You said that Libertas's opposition to Homosexuality was a reason to condone the party, but how many Christain Democrat, Conservative parties exist that preach said message and do quite well in the polls as a result ?

Yes, but that is one stand-out reason that I will not vote for them. I am not gay, but a good friend of mine recently had to move to the UK in order to be able to marry his long term partner. As his partner is a non-EU citizen, they are now not allowed into Ireland unless he gets a visa. This is not a good situation, and it is a situation which Libertas would seem to support. This issue is therefore important to me and I will not accept your dismissal of it as nonsense.

Iwasfrozen

Yes, but that is one stand-out reason that I will not vote for them. I am not gay, but a good friend of mine recently had to move to the UK in order to be able to marry his long term partner. As his partner is a non-EU citizen, they are now not allowed into Ireland unless he gets a visa. This is not a good situation, and it is a situation which Libertas would seem to support. This issue is therefore important to me and I will not accept your dismissal of it as nonsense.

So you where perpared to publicly denonce the party becuase they disagree with a friend of yours ? If you are to publicly denonce every person/group of people that are anti-Homosexuality then you are going to be a very tired man by the time your finished denoncing.

humanji

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

So you where perpared to publicly denonce the party becuase they disagree with a friend of yours ? If you are to publicly denonce every person/group of people that are anti-Homosexuality then you are going to be a very tired man by the time your finished denoncing.

Eh, would a political party's wish to oppress a portion of a a populace not go against them in an election? You wouldn't consider that a reason to not vote for them?

Iwasfrozen

Eh, would a political party's wish to oppress a portion of a a populace not go against them in an election? You wouldn't consider that a reason to not vote for them?

I wouldn't, personally I am pro Civil Partnership [as long as that is as far as it goes, no marraige]. And as for working against them in an election tell that to the Republicans, Tories, Front National, CDU or even Fine Gael, all of which aren't exactly failing in the polls.

Denerick

They probably shouldn't be taken seriously, but feck it, I'm voting for Ganley.

Don't get me wrong, their political campaign is certainly based on exploiting ignorance and hysterical emotionalism, but they do actually stand for something I stand for - a controlled Europe. Europe is gradually becoming more centralised, more layered up with buraucracy and red tape. Anyone who is remotely involved in the agricultural business (Farming or fishing) will have first experience of the headache the EU causes for their lives. But thats not even the issue. The problem is one of encroaching authoritarianism, a tendency we've seen thoughout the 90s and which has accelerated in the 00s. Britain of course, under the most authoritarian governments in decades, is leading the way with ID cards, national databases, and the gradual dissension of the liberal, innocent until proven guilty judicial system the west has until recently held so close to its heart.

So yes, Libertas is a deeply flawed party, which is decidedly vague on policy and prone to capitalise on general ignorance, but damn it, the EU needs a spanner in its wheels. It needs to rethink things and really consider where its going. Politics has to change. At the moment, the EU is moving far quicker than the citizens are willing to go. In short, we're not politically aware enough as a society to make any pledge in Europe. Europe is too apathetic to really decide on whether we want a massive European government deciding our legislation, because that is where we are very gradually going. And its not necessarily a bad thing, but when only half of the population bothers turning out to vote it says a lot about our civic culture.

And frankly the thought of a true European wide political party with (In theory at least) liberal, democratic ideals spanning the continent is a very exciting advancement if we wish to see Europe advance along the lines of a Liberal federal Republic across the continent.

/stream of consciousness.

turgon

Tbh Denerick I don't doubt that Libertas say they are for a controlled Europe, however I think the fact is that their idea of "control" is the removal of the EU.

They say they are for accountability and better decision making, but these are two issues Lisbon would have helped which for some reason they opposed.

I think it is all just political opportunism and skepticism.

BlitzKrieg

And frankly the thought of a true European wide political party with (In theory at least) liberal, democratic ideals spanning the continent is a very exciting advancement if we wish to see Europe advance along the lines of a Liberal federal Republic across the continent.

except that party doesnt exist. Libertas being a pan european party is the same as the Greens being a pan european party, they're not. They are a pan european political group (which if they have 25 meps across seven states they can be recognised by the EU and supported) they lack all the attributes of a politcal party on a european level. They have no manifesto and no elected leader. They do have all the trappings of a european group though, different parties with different policies and agenda's forming together to support each other for a common goal.

Libertas has openly bought and integrated parties into their ranks and even with all this talk of pan european wonder they still name each party as a seperate identity, libertas UK, libertas Sweden etc etc.

There is no pan european party.


And libertas dont even stand for what you say they do. They stand for whatever they need to stand for. In poland and france its for national soverignty for rolling back the EU, in Germany its a unified Europe against the islamic invasion. He says he wants to protect ireland's role in the EU and then turns around in Rome and says he wants the parliament to be the executive, which will make things much worse for ireland because our executive power goes from 1 out of 27 to 13 out of 700+

He's no good, he even endorsed an irish mep thats been caught abusing her powers (kathy sinnot) and still has the nerve to say he is the only one standing against mep abuse

is_that_so

P. Breathnach wrote: »

It's not something I have done before, so I don't know if you will get it. [It seems to have worked.]

Now that is a truly fine piece of work. I did learn from your postcard that Declan Ganley can do better and then it just gets really confusing. As clear as what we were being asked to vote on last year maybe?

For those who think that Ganley may get in, remember that the constituency covers 1/3 of the counties in the country. It includes Counties Donegal, Cavan, Monaghan, Leitrim, Sligo, Mayo, Roscommon, Galway Clare, Westmeath and Longford. He will need somewhere in the order of 13% of first preferences to even stand a chance, that was about 54,000 votes the last time. I don't think the other two are even in with a prayer and the lady in Dublin must be odds on to be eliminated first.

eightyfish

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

And libertas dont even stand for what you say they do. They stand for whatever they need to stand for. In poland and france its for national soverignty for rolling back the EU, in Germany its a unified Europe against the islamic invasion. He says he wants to protect ireland's role in the EU and then turns around in Rome and says he wants the parliament to be the executive, which will make things much worse for ireland because our executive power goes from 1 out of 27 to 13 out of 700+

Interesting. Opportunism again.

eightyfish

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

So you where perpared to publicly denonce the party becuase they disagree with a friend of yours ? If you are to publicly denonce every person/group of people that are anti-Homosexuality then you are going to be a very tired man by the time your finished denoncing.

You oversimplify. It's not just that they don't agree, it's that he is now married (or in a civil union, the terminology is not important) and can't come home to his friends and family with his partner like everybody else can. He had to leave a well-paid job in an Irish hospital to go and work in a Scottish hospital and they have to live in a city were they know no-one. Freedom of the EU is a basic right for every other person married to an EU citizen, why should it be any different for them?

And yes, I think it is justified to publicly denounce a party if they support such backward legislation.

Scofflaw

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

except that party doesnt exist. Libertas being a pan european party is the same as the Greens being a pan european party, they're not. They are a pan european political group (which if they have 25 meps across seven states they can be recognised by the EU and supported) they lack all the attributes of a politcal party on a european level. They have no manifesto and no elected leader. They do have all the trappings of a european group though, different parties with different policies and agenda's forming together to support each other for a common goal.

Libertas has openly bought and integrated parties into their ranks and even with all this talk of pan european wonder they still name each party as a seperate identity, libertas UK, libertas Sweden etc etc.

There is no pan european party.


And libertas dont even stand for what you say they do. They stand for whatever they need to stand for. In poland and france its for national soverignty for rolling back the EU, in Germany its a unified Europe against the islamic invasion. He says he wants to protect ireland's role in the EU and then turns around in Rome and says he wants the parliament to be the executive, which will make things much worse for ireland because our executive power goes from 1 out of 27 to 13 out of 700+

He's no good, he even endorsed an irish mep thats been caught abusing her powers (kathy sinnot) and still has the nerve to say he is the only one standing against mep abuse

In an illustration of the divergence of the various bits of Libertas, here's his Dutch candidate, Elise Van Den Broek, supporting waterboarding:

Libertas has made itself heard again. Today, head of list Eline van den Broek debated on two core competences of the European Union: economic cooperation and security.

Eline was a guest in the Radio 1 programme Standpunt cafe (opinion cafe). Today this programmme dealt with the statements of Dick Cheney. The former US vice-president has stated he has no regrets of the controversial interrogation techniques that have been executed under his term of administration. Methods such as waterboarding are assumed to have helped in getting the necessary information to prevent terrorist attacks. Libertas head of list Eline van den Broek says she agrees with Cheney´s statements. In order to ensure the security, sometimes you need to interrogate the hard way, according to Libertas. "terrorist suspects need to be dealt with in a tough way, because we do not tolerate terrorists in a safe and secure Europe" says van den Broek. Taking care of the security of citizens is one of the core tasks that the EU should keep in mind, according to Libertas.

That's a slightly tidy version, but the Google Translate version is here. A stance I don't imagine Irish Libertas would be exactly keen to publicise.

Here's Swedish Libertas pointing the opposite way from Libertas' campaign in Ireland:

Afterwards got Marita Ulvskog to comment and said that Ganley has a vision of society which is characterized by "the Catholic values." It is true enough in a private plane for the Irishman Declan Ganley, like most other Irish, but it has no relevance for the political ideology and Libertas Sweden?

In the first place. None of the Swedish Libertas candidates or staff are Catholics. Like all Swedes, we are influenced by the secular Sweden, and goes well in the church as often as most - in other words, to baptisms, weddings and funerals. One of our candidates - Kenneth Landelius - Marriage is a priest and has worked as a priest in 21 years in the Swedish Church. And the Swedish Church is not Catholic - at least it was not there, the last time any of us were there.

Drumming up the Catholic vote in Ireland via adverts (and hagiographic pieces) in Alive!, while denying it thrice in Sweden...

Their Slovenian branch (or web page) calls for lobbying transparency:

The European Commission will not require an entry in the register of around 15,000 lobbyists. Until now, only 9% enter in the register of lobbyists, which was introduced in June 2008. The Libertas is unacceptable that thousands of lobbyists not to disclose and not to clarify their interests. Without transparency and openness of the exercise decision-making behind closed doors.

According to a study should not be 55% associations, 53% of the enterprises and 41% of companies have the intention to be entered in the register.

Libertas calls for a mandatory entry in the register, as the only way to ensure transparency of decision-making.

Which is good...but one of their UK candidates is a lobbyist, and neither her company nor the Association she is a Fellow of are on the Register.

And so on, and so forth. One presumes that a pan-European party of principle would sound the same wherever it was running - this doesn't look like that. What do you get when you vote for Libertas?

cordially,
Scofflaw

eightyfish

Scofflaw wrote: »

And so on, and so forth. One presumes that a pan-European party of principle would sound the same wherever it was running - this doesn't look like that. What do you get when you vote for Libertas?

Reminds me of the Daily Mail.

Iwasfrozen

You oversimplify. It's not just that they don't agree, it's that he is now married (or in a civil union, the terminology is not important) and can't come home to his friends and family with his partner like everybody else can. He had to leave a well-paid job in an Irish hospital to go and work in a Scottish hospital and they have to live in a city were they know no-one. Freedom of the EU is a basic right for every other person married to an EU citizen, why should it be any different for them?

What you consider over-simpliying I consider calling a spade a spade. The main parties in Ireland Finne Fail, Fine gael etc. do not want Civil Partnerships as do the majority of the people, I sorry about your friend but the law is the law. If I wanted smoke weed I have two choices, Move to Amsterdam and smoke every day or stay in Ireland and stay off weed. The law cannot and willnot change for these people while the People do not want it. Also your friend can live in Ireland but the State won't recognise their union.

And yes, I think it is justified to publicly denounce a party if they support such backward legislation

And this is where your arguement becomes insulting, are you calling the majority of the Irish People and the Irish Government backward because they don't adhear to the same ideology as you ?

PopeBuckfastXVI

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

And this is where your arguement becomes insulting, are you calling the majority of the Irish People and the Irish Government backward because they don't adhear to the same ideology as you ?

Way off topic, but I think that in 100 years time, those that now say a woman cannot marry another woman, or a man cannot marry another man will be viewed in the same light as those who said a black person cannot marry a white person, or a jew cannot marry a christian are viewed now.

Call it what you like; conservative, atavistic, anachronistic, reactionary, backward.

Please don't be insulted, it's just been pointed out that you're against societal progress, and you're well within your rights to be.