|
5. Capital freedoms instead of social standards.
Central principles of the treaty, such as the free movement of capital or global competition have contributed to the EU contracting the financial crisis. Instead of erasing these principles from the treaties, the Lisbon Treaty grants them an even higher importance. In contrast, governments were not able to agree on common social standards or the precedence of civil rights.
Free movement of capital
Since 1994, the EU Treaty of Maastricht has decreed the total freedom of capital flows between the EU and all countries of the world. The immense dangers resulting from this policy have already become apparent to the states of Southeast Asia in 1998, when in the wake of a blind liberalisation of capital transactions they were plunged into a series crisis. In the meantime, the EU itself has also been presented with the bill for its policy of free monetary flows which enabled foul real-estate credits and their derivates „worth" hundreds of billions to enter the EU unhindered and nestle in the balance sheets of EU banks. These turned into financial toxic waste dumps. Instead of learning from the crisis and revoking the dogma of free movement of capital around the world, the governments are holding on to it with religious zeal and intend to steamroller the Lisbon Treaty.
This is a grave mistake: The superordinate aim of economic policy must be the sustainable development as well as ecologically acceptable and globally fair prosperity for everyone. The capital flow must be a means to this end; it must not be an end in itself.
Competition instead of public services
In the same way, the principle of competition which in the wake of the liberalisation of public services (energy, postal service, railways) has worsened services for many people while increasing their costs, is not softened in any way by the Lisbon Treaty, on the contrary:
The new section 14 VAEU makes it plain that „economic services of public interest" (i.e. public services / services of general interest) are subject to EU competition law and state aid law)!
This means that basic provision services, such as water, energy, postal services, public transport, but also health, education and pensions, are organised via the „free" market subject to profit seeking and competition.
The result is a fundamental end to just about all public services – although these are especially vital for people! EU law is turning into a battering ram against democratic goods. Instead of democracy, the Lisbon Treaty is fostering the power of shareholders.
Public goods on an EU level (such as an EU railway or internet for all) are unprovided for!
Social standards:
While EU regulations concerning domestic deficits and national debt (Maastricht Criteria) are enforced with reprimands and sanctions, there are no comparable social or work standards.
Instead, the free movement of goods and capital leads to
The Lisbon Treaty does nothing to change this, when actually things should be the other way round:
-
in a first step, work, social, wage and tax standards are harmonised (wages in relation to economic performance and purchasing power),
- only then companies may offer their services throughout the single market.
The fact that the Lisbon Treaty does not provide for a principle of unanimity in connection with social and tax policies will continue to permit individual member states (one minister) to prevent any social standard or improvement in labour law.
The Parliament has no say in tax issues while in social issues the EU is only partly competent.
Fundamental rights:
The positive Fundamental Rights Charta is relativised by a number of aspects.
-
First, it was banished to the appendices as a clear sign of its importance within the Treaty.
-
Second, it does not take precedence over the rest of EU legislation, but remains on equal terms. This will lead to „interesting" collisions with the commercial freedoms. The latest judgements by the ECJ certainly forebode that EU judges will decide in favour of commercial freedoms in case of doubt.
-
Third, the Charta is only valid on EU level, not for the member states themselves. Where there are no fundamental rights, they are not put in place.
-
Fourth, the Charta does not apply to all member states: Poland and Great Britain are excluded. Just as in the case of the structured military cooperation, the Lisbon Treaty is creating a further core Europe with a periphery. This is especially embarrassing in the case of fundamental rights. How is the EU meant to act with any credibility as a civil rights community, if it can agree on the free movement of capital, but not on fundamental rights?
10255 people from 26 EU member states signed the petition already (since September 2009) | 
