Irexit Freedom Party

ArchXStanton wrote: »

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/business/ireland-under-fresh-attack-from-eu-on-corporation-tax-897813.html

Seriously lads do yas pay no attention to the rumblings from Brussels...

KNOWN OUTCOMES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN AGREED AS TRUE BY ALL SIDES:

1: The UK along with all existing members of the EU lose their abstention veto in 2020 as laid down in the Lisbon Treaty when the system changes to that of majority acceptance with no abstentions or veto’s being allowed.

This is wrong. The Lisbon Treaty did make changes to how EU law gets passed which reduced the scope of states’ veto ability, but it did not abolish veto powers; and these changes are already in effect, rather than coming into force in 2020. The term “abstention veto” is not a part of European Union law (as you can see by the fact that most Google results for the term are references to this list.)

EU legislation has to be approved by the Council of the European Union, which is made up of ministerial representatives of the governments of all EU member states.

Depending on the type of issue it is voting on, it has three different standards for passing laws—a simple majority (where 15 out of the 28 states must agree); “qualified majority” (where laws must be approved by at least 55% of states, that have to represent at least 65% of the EU’s population); and a unanimous vote (where all voting states must agree, which therefore gives any single government a veto over the law.)

The Lisbon Treaty changed a large number of policy areas from being ones that needed unanimity (thus giving states a veto) to ones that were decided by qualified majority. At the same time, the Lisbon Treaty changed how qualified majority voting worked—this actually gave the UK slightly more voting power than it had before through the link with a country’s population, which is widely seen as having benefited large countries such as the UK, France and Germany.

The UK also doesn’t have to participate in EU legislation relating to justice and home affairs, but can choose to opt-in if it wants to.

It’s not clear what is meant by the claim that the Lisbon Treaty would see states losing their “abstention veto”. On issues that require unanimity, it’s the case that simply abstaining from a vote does not stop it passing (the Lisbon Treaty did not change this), but states can still veto by voting against.

“Taxation is a sovereign member state competence and decisions at [European] Council on tax matters require unanimity,” a spokeswoman for Mr Donohoe said on Tuesday.

stefanovich wrote: »

Removing unanimity is the same as removing veto.