CAMPAIGN LAUNCH:THE REFERENDUM Commission will correct claims about the Lisbon Treaty that are false, but will not enter into "a war of words" with any of the parties in the debate, according to its chairman, Mr Justice Clarke.
Speaking at the launch of its campaign yesterday, he said the suggestion that the minimum wage would be reduced as a result of the treaty, for example, needed correction.
“The Lisbon Treaty says nothing about whether a country has a minimum wage or what that is,” he said. “The minimum wage is not a competence given to the EU.” Referring to other issues in the debate, he said: “It is not for us to say whether the economy will be better off or not. We are not in the business of commenting on any claim. But we do identify the issues that are in the Lisbon Treaty and those that are not.”
For example, claims had been made about the impact of a rejection on Ireland’s economic future, and that the treaty would open the door to an erosion of workers’ rights. Nothing in the treaty explicitly addressed either of these issues, which were matters for the people to assess.
However, he expected issues to arise in the coming weeks that would require clarification from the commission, and if it felt it came within its remit, it would do so. He added that the job of the commission was to encourage people to vote, and to vote in an informed way. It had produced a short guide to what the treaty, if passed, would do, to be distributed to every household, and a longer explanation, available on the commission’s website and on request.
The treaty was mainly concerned with changing the way the EU makes decisions, and also affects some of its powers, he said.
If ratified, the main changes introduced by the treaty would be: giving the European Parliament joint power with the Council of Ministers over some areas, such as agriculture and the EU budget; some decisions now taken unanimously would be take by a qualified majority vote, while others, such as those in defence and taxation, would still be taken unanimously; the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights would be given the same legal value as the main treaties; and EU countries would be obliged to assist each other if one was attacked or suffered a natural disaster, subject to individual countries’ policies on security and defence, including neutrality.
Asked to respond to Patricia McKenna’s charge that the commission was not impartial in the material it produced, he said the law required it to be impartial, and he and the other commissioners took the law very seriously and were satisfied their information was impartial.
“It is inevitable that in the heat of a campaign some people may not be happy,” he said.
CHANGES IN APPROACH
The most obvious difference is the identity of the chairman. Mr Justice Frank Clarke replaced Mr Justice Iarlaith O’Neill as chairman. Mr Justice Clarke has long experience of the media and is comfortable with it, having gained wide media exposure as chairman of the Bar Council.
This commission, as its chairman pointed out yesterday, is starting with a much higher base level of knowledge about the treaty than the previous one. Research carried out by the commission showed that 60 per cent of respondents now say they have some knowledge of the treaty, compared with 21 per cent at the beginning of the last campaign.
This commission has already produced more reader-friendly information, with a seven-page guide containing the main points of the treaty. There is also a 27-page extended guide with more detailed information, available on the website and from the commission. The last commission produced a single, 14-page, detailed explanatory booklet that was unlikely to be read in its entirety.