Saturday, 28 January 2012
Sunday, 22 January 2012
The socialist aim
From: carmans45@bigpond.com
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2012 10:48 AMSubject: The socialist aim.. Reprinted from political ad in the Western Australian Sunday Times, December 3, 1995
Some of you have seen this before, but good to be reminded..
The left will want to stay in government as long as possible and even though they are not popular they will want to make sure that they get as much of their agenda in as possible.. the left world wide are the same.
Hitler said
All propaganda has to be popular and has to accommodate itself to the comprehension of the least intelligent of those whom it seeks to reach.
Adolf Hitler
Adolf Hitler
So after the population wakes up to the wool that has continually been pulled over their eyes, they would have their agenda all finished...
...
The socialists aim, (see a portion below) and they are well ahead of schedule.. Gaye
Reprinted from political ad in the Western Australian Sunday Times, December 3, 1995
In 1944, Democratic U.S. Congressman Samuel Pettengill warned America that socialists would endeavor to have the U.S. spend itself into bankruptcy, with a view to making citizens totally dependent on a centralized government.
Pettengill detailed TEN POINTS of the socialist manifesto that would destroy free government. Almost 50 years later, down under in Australia, it is disturbing to reflect on Pettengill’s 10 points.
1) People must be made to feel their utter helplessness and their inability to solve their own problems. While in this state of mind, there is held up before them a benign and all-wise leader to whom they MUST look to the cure for all their ills.
2) The principle of local self-government must be WIPED OUT, so that this leader or group in control can have all the political power readily at hand.
3) Constitutional guarantees must be swept aside. This accomplished in part by RIDICULING them as outmoded and an obstruction to progress.
4) Public faith in the legal profession and respect for the courts must be undermined. The law making body must be intimidated and from time to time rebuked, so as to prevent the development of public confidence in it.
5) Economically, the people must be ground down by high taxes, which under one pretext or another they are called upon to pay. Thus they are brought to a common level and all income above a meager living is taken from them. In this manner, economic independence is kept to a minimum.
6) A great public debt must be built so the citizens can never escape its burden, making government the virtual receiver for the entire nation.
7) A general distrust of private business and industry must be kept alive so the public may not begin to rely on its own resources.
Government bureaus are set up to control practically every phase of the citizen’s lives.9) The education of the youth of the nation is taken under CONTROL so that all may be indoctrinated at an early age with a spirit of submission to the system.
10) To supplement and fortify all the foregoing, there is kept up a steady stream of GOVERNMENT PROPAGANDA designed to extol all who bow the knee and to vilify those who dare raise a voice of dissent.
Samuel Barret Pettengill U. S. Congressman 1886-1974 Reprinted from an article in Ken Hamblin ‘Talks with America’ News letter Feb. 19. 1996
P.O.. Box 562 Castle Rock, CO 80104
PETTENGILL, Samuel Barrett, (nephew of William Horace Clagett), a Representative from Indiana; born in Portland, Oreg., January 19, 1886; in 1892 moved to Vermont with his father, who settled on a farm in Grafton, Windham County; attended the common schools; was graduated from Vermont Academy at Saxtons River in 1904, from Middlebury College, Middlebury, Vt., in 1908, and from the law department of Yale University in 1911; was admitted to the bar in 1912 and commenced practice in South Bend, Ind.; member of the board of education of South Bend, 1926-1928; elected as a Democrat to the Seventy-second and to the three succeeding Congresses (March 4, 1931-January 3, 1939); was not a candidate for renomination in 1938 to the Seventy-sixth Congress; resumed the practice of law; newspaper columist 1939-1948; vice president and general counsel of the Transportation Association of America, 1943-1945; national radio commentator, 1946-1948; attorney for the Pure Oil Co., Chicago, Ill., 1949-1956; consultant, the Coe Foundation, 1956-1965; resided at his boyhood farm near Grafton, Vt.; died in Springfield, Vt., March 20, 1974; interment in Grafton Village Cemetery, Grafton, Vt.
_________________
To those who have fought for it, freedom has a
flavor the protected will never know. -- Scrawled on a bunker outside Khe Sahn, RVN
"We will fight them there or we will fight them here."
Marine Lance Cpl. Matthew Medlicott(KIA Aug.25,2007)
Remember that socialism is a twin to communism and under the guise of saying that they want to help poorer people they destroy us... Gaye
Wednesday, 18 January 2012
The Legal Fiction - How They Control Us
The Legal Fiction - How They Control Us
Judges know how the ‘legal fiction’ applies to each of us, but barristers, solicitors, Magistrates and politicians mostly do not – it is a closely guarded secret. Our courts impose their will on us using the ‘legal fiction’ and it is through this imposition that governments are able to control every facet of our lives. Without the ‘legal fiction’ governments and an array of authorities have no power over us whatsoever and with this in mind it is perfectly clear that understanding the ‘legal fiction’ is a prerequisite to understanding how the world around us really works as distinct from how we think it does. Knowledge and understanding of the legal fiction is the first step on the road of freedom.
Imagine having a conversation in the 10th century in which you were describing a mobile telephone to an audience... they would to a man and woman think you were a complete lunatic... despite being able to explain the science behind it, and so it is with trying to explain the ‘legal fiction’ today. Fortunately, thanks to people like John Harris, Winston Shrout, Robert Arthur Menard and others, the secret of the ‘legal fiction’ also known as the ‘strawman’ has been laid bare and as a consequence those of us who are prepared to learn are now able to take advantage of this very important knowledge.
But bear in mind this... the ‘powers-that-be’ have a vested interest in us not knowing how they effect their control over us... and this translates into them being adamant that you must not know of the existence of the legal fiction, never mind understand it. So if you are thinking about writing to the government and asking them to confirm the existence of the legal fiction, may I suggest that your time would be better spent writing to the mafia and asking them to confirm in writing that they are indeed engaged in organised crime. Please let us know if you get a reply.
The legal fiction is described briefly as ‘a means by which something can be done in law, which, without the legal fiction, would not be possible.’ Look it up in a law dictionary. There are many applications of the legal fiction concept and only through study will you get to grips with the extent of its functions. It is not complicated, just confusing and understanding it requires that you resist the urge to dismiss it as a nonsense. Because we have limited understanding of the origins of the universe, that does not mean that it does not exist - and so it is with the legal fiction.
It is easy to see then how despite you being the only owner and thus the controller of the legal fiction ‘ROGER HAYES LIMITED’ that it remains an entirely separate entity to you. You could sell the company and somebody else would then control it, despite it keeping your name. Now to deliberately confuse you... this entity was also given the generic name ’person’ and yes, it is meant to confuse you. In legalese (the language of law) the word ‘person’ means company or corporation; it does not mean man or woman. In an ordinary dictionary ‘person’ is described as an individual human being. In a law dictionary ‘human being’ is described as a monster. Do you think they were trying to bring clarity to the meaning of words or do you think they were trying to create confusion? Obviously it was the latter and it was both deliberate and calculated.
When you were born (still assuming that your name is Roger Hayes) and your parents registered your birth, the government set up a company which they called ROGER HAYES. If you look at all your official documents you will see that they are all represented with capital letters as a means of distinction. It is important to remember, that as it was the government that created this company, it is they that own and control it – despite it having your name. The deceit was in the fact that they did not tell you, nor did they want you to know, that they would use this company (person) as a tool to attach liabilities to the real you.
Thus, ROGER HAYES the company was created and existed alongside Roger Hayes the flesh and blood boy created and named by your parents. But in the absence of the knowledge of the existence of the former everybody was led to believe that everything applied to the latter – as devious a plan surely as selling land on the sun to the unsuspecting.
When officialdom then asks the question ‘Are you Roger Hayes?’ What they are really asking is ‘Do you accept the liabilities for ROGER HAYES the company (i.e. the person)?’ and when you say YES – you are unwittingly accepting the liabilities placed upon the ‘person’ (company) that they own and through which they establish their authority over you . How very clever and devious is that?
Roger Hayes is a flesh and blood man. ROGER HAYES is a person (company) – and they are separate entities. You control you, they control the person, if you accept the liability of the person – then they control you.
All Acts of Parliament are applied to the ‘person’ (the company), and not the man or the woman. This is self-evident in that the words man or women are never used in Acts of Parliament. So Acts do not therefore apply to the flesh and blood man or woman, if they did, they would say so. Acts of Parliament extend to you the man or woman only if and when (through your ignorance) you accept the responsibility and liability of the ‘person.’ When a policeman or a judge asks you for your name – they are tricking you into accepting their authority over you, because you have unwittingly assumed responsibility for the legal fiction (despite them also being ignorant of this fact) and the fact is that they must get you to acknowledge ‘the name’ i.e. ‘the person’ i.e. the ‘legal fiction’ ‘ROGER HAYES’ before they can assume their authority over you. When you say YES my name is ROGER HAYES, you are submitting/consenting to their authority, and conversely if you deny the liability of the corporate entity then you deny them the control that they need to enforce their penalty charge notices upon you. Denial of consent is denial of authority which means no penalties. It is as simple as that.
So now you know - government secures its authority over you by simply asking your name, or by getting you to fill in one of their forms. If you understand this then you can start to adjust the way in which you respond to their demands. Learn how to respond to this deceitful tyranny and your life will change; you will become freer in mind, in spirit and in reality. And the more of us pushing them back the faster we will take back control of our nation.
By denying the control that the legal fiction creates, you will be making an enormous stride in securing your freedom.
The fact remains that the Government and its institutions, i.e. the police, the courts, the taxman have authority over you by virtue of you unwittingly giving them your consent. But, whilst statutes (Acts of Parliament) apply only to the legal fiction – common law most definitely applies to YOU - the flesh and blood man or women. Be very careful to understand the difference. Common law which the police monitor as peace officers (constables) protects our natural rights, common law are the rules that govern how we behave towards our fellow men in order that we can all to live in peace and harmony with others without the threat of harm or loss.
So speeding, parking, council tax, VAT, PAYE etc all apply to the ‘legal fiction’ which you have an absolute right to reject if you so choose, but if standing up for your rights is too much trouble, you can chose to continue to remain compliant and obedient. Take your choice.
I have no objection to paying my fair share towards running a system of which we are all beneficiaries, but I will not be dictated to. If refusing to pay my council tax, speeding and parking fines is the way to bring about change that will benefit us all, then that is what I am going to do. Hopefully many more people will start thinking and acting like free men and women, the sooner we do then the sooner we will close down the tyranny and the sooner our lives will start to improve.
BUT... and there’s always a but, the ‘legal fiction’ has benefits as well as liabilities. The NHS, schooling, child benefits, land and home ownership, bank accounts etc, all come to you courtesy of the ‘legal fiction.’ If you want to dump the liabilities, you are potentially going to have to dump all the benefits as well. So you have to have a clear understanding on what it is you are letting yourself in for before you start messing with the system.
Dear reader, our controllers are not stupid... they have been working their scheme for a long time. They have devised a system that gives as well as it takes and it has been a careful balance of both of these that has allowed them to maintain their control. So if there are benefits as well as liabilities and we do not want to throw the baby out with the bath water, where do we go from here?
The answer to that dilemma is simple. The system can be used for our overall benefit. The bad guys have taken control of it and they are quite deliberately using it for their benefit at our expense. They are using it to fine us excessively and needlessly to feed their greed, to tax and persecute us; keeping us on a tread mill of servitude and making our lives a misery in the process. We have a right to take the benefits and reject the liabilities when the balance has been distorted to our detriment – which clearly it is.
The writer has been in court (on numerous occasions) denying the liabilities of the legal fiction – to date 100% successfully. There have been some feisty moments - it has been an interesting journey during which compliant servants of the system have watched in bewilderment (and ignorance) as we (many friends and activists) have turned up at court and said NO... we do not accept your authority. The shock to authority is palpable; they respond by shouting, barking orders for us to obey, they use threats, intimidation and occasionally they call their security guards and the police to try and force us into submission – all to no avail. We have stood our ground and witnessed the weakening of their resolve and have watched as they have instead slowly started to submit to our authority. In court now, we ask the questions and they do the responding. They become particularly more compliant when we remind them that the courts belong to the people... not them.
The flesh and blood man is considerably more powerful than their legal fiction controls; it is just a matter of discovering how it is that we can demonstrate our authority over them. It has been and will continue to be a bumpy ride, made smoother with the support of those who attend courts as witnesses. The British Constitution Group is pushing the tide of tyranny back slowly but surely, we do it with the knowledge that we are right and they are wrong as evidenced by their gradual submission to our demands. But we still have a long way to go. The more of us that join the fight, the faster we will take back control. We do not need elections or referendums or any other controlled mechanism to free ourselves from corrupt government be it in the UK or in Brussels, we just need the spirit, determination and courage to stand up and say NO.
We, the British people have right to govern ourselves, we have a natural instinct to want to preserve our sovereignty and our independence... but we have been lulled into thinking that we need the permission of a powerful elite to secure it... we do not.
We have become confused about our identity and our nationhood - we no longer understand the purpose of our constitution and the rule-of-law. Some of us have been fooled into thinking of ourselves as European, a universal description with as much meaning as calling ourselves earthlings. We are British – English, Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish. We have amongst us people from every country on earth, here to share in what is unique to these islands and the British people – a nation of tolerance, compassion, fortitude, fair play and justice. We have taken these values to the world – and it seems that the time has come to do so again.
Our future will not be determined by a political party, it will not be determined by puppets like Clegg, Cameron or Brown (remember him?)... our future will be forged by those amongst us who find the courage to stand up for our rights and declare them to the world.
The tyranny that has been build up around us will crumble when we stand up and defend ourselves. This is a game of numbers... when there are more of us than there are of them... the job will be done.
So What Is The Legal Fiction & How Does It Impact On Our Lives?
If you tried to explain the concept of the ‘legal fiction’ to the average individual in the context of how it applies to them, there is a high degree of probability that they would stare back at you as though you were quite mad... explanation rarely attracts a demand to know more, which it should, generally people find comprehension beyond their scope of understanding and they prefer therefore to dismiss it as an absurdity. The creators of the legal fiction knew this and have used our own ignorance to further their aims to control and dominate us, their ultimate weapon being ‘plausible deniability.’ But suddenly we are waking up to what is really going on and as we do the shackles of control are starting to loosen.Imagine having a conversation in the 10th century in which you were describing a mobile telephone to an audience... they would to a man and woman think you were a complete lunatic... despite being able to explain the science behind it, and so it is with trying to explain the ‘legal fiction’ today. Fortunately, thanks to people like John Harris, Winston Shrout, Robert Arthur Menard and others, the secret of the ‘legal fiction’ also known as the ‘strawman’ has been laid bare and as a consequence those of us who are prepared to learn are now able to take advantage of this very important knowledge.
But bear in mind this... the ‘powers-that-be’ have a vested interest in us not knowing how they effect their control over us... and this translates into them being adamant that you must not know of the existence of the legal fiction, never mind understand it. So if you are thinking about writing to the government and asking them to confirm the existence of the legal fiction, may I suggest that your time would be better spent writing to the mafia and asking them to confirm in writing that they are indeed engaged in organised crime. Please let us know if you get a reply.
The legal fiction is described briefly as ‘a means by which something can be done in law, which, without the legal fiction, would not be possible.’ Look it up in a law dictionary. There are many applications of the legal fiction concept and only through study will you get to grips with the extent of its functions. It is not complicated, just confusing and understanding it requires that you resist the urge to dismiss it as a nonsense. Because we have limited understanding of the origins of the universe, that does not mean that it does not exist - and so it is with the legal fiction.
A Company Is A Legal Fiction
If we assume that your name is Roger Hayes... you could create a legal fiction called ‘ROGER HAYES LIMITED’ which you could own lock, stock and barrel. You could lend the company money and it in turn could buy and own plant, machinery and stock and build up an array of assets and wealth through trade - all of which would then belong to the company... but not you. Yes you would own the company, but the company would own the assets. If on behalf of the company you sold some stock, you would be required to put the proceeds into the company’s bank account and not your own private account. The company would be obliged to pay back the money that you lent it, but apart from that the only way that you could take any benefit from the company would be if it paid you a wage as a manager or a dividend as a shareholder and if the company went bust with net liabilities, you would not be liable for its debts.It is easy to see then how despite you being the only owner and thus the controller of the legal fiction ‘ROGER HAYES LIMITED’ that it remains an entirely separate entity to you. You could sell the company and somebody else would then control it, despite it keeping your name. Now to deliberately confuse you... this entity was also given the generic name ’person’ and yes, it is meant to confuse you. In legalese (the language of law) the word ‘person’ means company or corporation; it does not mean man or woman. In an ordinary dictionary ‘person’ is described as an individual human being. In a law dictionary ‘human being’ is described as a monster. Do you think they were trying to bring clarity to the meaning of words or do you think they were trying to create confusion? Obviously it was the latter and it was both deliberate and calculated.
When you were born (still assuming that your name is Roger Hayes) and your parents registered your birth, the government set up a company which they called ROGER HAYES. If you look at all your official documents you will see that they are all represented with capital letters as a means of distinction. It is important to remember, that as it was the government that created this company, it is they that own and control it – despite it having your name. The deceit was in the fact that they did not tell you, nor did they want you to know, that they would use this company (person) as a tool to attach liabilities to the real you.
Thus, ROGER HAYES the company was created and existed alongside Roger Hayes the flesh and blood boy created and named by your parents. But in the absence of the knowledge of the existence of the former everybody was led to believe that everything applied to the latter – as devious a plan surely as selling land on the sun to the unsuspecting.
When officialdom then asks the question ‘Are you Roger Hayes?’ What they are really asking is ‘Do you accept the liabilities for ROGER HAYES the company (i.e. the person)?’ and when you say YES – you are unwittingly accepting the liabilities placed upon the ‘person’ (company) that they own and through which they establish their authority over you . How very clever and devious is that?
Roger Hayes is a flesh and blood man. ROGER HAYES is a person (company) – and they are separate entities. You control you, they control the person, if you accept the liability of the person – then they control you.
All Acts of Parliament are applied to the ‘person’ (the company), and not the man or the woman. This is self-evident in that the words man or women are never used in Acts of Parliament. So Acts do not therefore apply to the flesh and blood man or woman, if they did, they would say so. Acts of Parliament extend to you the man or woman only if and when (through your ignorance) you accept the responsibility and liability of the ‘person.’ When a policeman or a judge asks you for your name – they are tricking you into accepting their authority over you, because you have unwittingly assumed responsibility for the legal fiction (despite them also being ignorant of this fact) and the fact is that they must get you to acknowledge ‘the name’ i.e. ‘the person’ i.e. the ‘legal fiction’ ‘ROGER HAYES’ before they can assume their authority over you. When you say YES my name is ROGER HAYES, you are submitting/consenting to their authority, and conversely if you deny the liability of the corporate entity then you deny them the control that they need to enforce their penalty charge notices upon you. Denial of consent is denial of authority which means no penalties. It is as simple as that.
So now you know - government secures its authority over you by simply asking your name, or by getting you to fill in one of their forms. If you understand this then you can start to adjust the way in which you respond to their demands. Learn how to respond to this deceitful tyranny and your life will change; you will become freer in mind, in spirit and in reality. And the more of us pushing them back the faster we will take back control of our nation.
By denying the control that the legal fiction creates, you will be making an enormous stride in securing your freedom.
The fact remains that the Government and its institutions, i.e. the police, the courts, the taxman have authority over you by virtue of you unwittingly giving them your consent. But, whilst statutes (Acts of Parliament) apply only to the legal fiction – common law most definitely applies to YOU - the flesh and blood man or women. Be very careful to understand the difference. Common law which the police monitor as peace officers (constables) protects our natural rights, common law are the rules that govern how we behave towards our fellow men in order that we can all to live in peace and harmony with others without the threat of harm or loss.
So speeding, parking, council tax, VAT, PAYE etc all apply to the ‘legal fiction’ which you have an absolute right to reject if you so choose, but if standing up for your rights is too much trouble, you can chose to continue to remain compliant and obedient. Take your choice.
I have no objection to paying my fair share towards running a system of which we are all beneficiaries, but I will not be dictated to. If refusing to pay my council tax, speeding and parking fines is the way to bring about change that will benefit us all, then that is what I am going to do. Hopefully many more people will start thinking and acting like free men and women, the sooner we do then the sooner we will close down the tyranny and the sooner our lives will start to improve.
BUT... and there’s always a but, the ‘legal fiction’ has benefits as well as liabilities. The NHS, schooling, child benefits, land and home ownership, bank accounts etc, all come to you courtesy of the ‘legal fiction.’ If you want to dump the liabilities, you are potentially going to have to dump all the benefits as well. So you have to have a clear understanding on what it is you are letting yourself in for before you start messing with the system.
Dear reader, our controllers are not stupid... they have been working their scheme for a long time. They have devised a system that gives as well as it takes and it has been a careful balance of both of these that has allowed them to maintain their control. So if there are benefits as well as liabilities and we do not want to throw the baby out with the bath water, where do we go from here?
The answer to that dilemma is simple. The system can be used for our overall benefit. The bad guys have taken control of it and they are quite deliberately using it for their benefit at our expense. They are using it to fine us excessively and needlessly to feed their greed, to tax and persecute us; keeping us on a tread mill of servitude and making our lives a misery in the process. We have a right to take the benefits and reject the liabilities when the balance has been distorted to our detriment – which clearly it is.
The writer has been in court (on numerous occasions) denying the liabilities of the legal fiction – to date 100% successfully. There have been some feisty moments - it has been an interesting journey during which compliant servants of the system have watched in bewilderment (and ignorance) as we (many friends and activists) have turned up at court and said NO... we do not accept your authority. The shock to authority is palpable; they respond by shouting, barking orders for us to obey, they use threats, intimidation and occasionally they call their security guards and the police to try and force us into submission – all to no avail. We have stood our ground and witnessed the weakening of their resolve and have watched as they have instead slowly started to submit to our authority. In court now, we ask the questions and they do the responding. They become particularly more compliant when we remind them that the courts belong to the people... not them.
The flesh and blood man is considerably more powerful than their legal fiction controls; it is just a matter of discovering how it is that we can demonstrate our authority over them. It has been and will continue to be a bumpy ride, made smoother with the support of those who attend courts as witnesses. The British Constitution Group is pushing the tide of tyranny back slowly but surely, we do it with the knowledge that we are right and they are wrong as evidenced by their gradual submission to our demands. But we still have a long way to go. The more of us that join the fight, the faster we will take back control. We do not need elections or referendums or any other controlled mechanism to free ourselves from corrupt government be it in the UK or in Brussels, we just need the spirit, determination and courage to stand up and say NO.
We, the British people have right to govern ourselves, we have a natural instinct to want to preserve our sovereignty and our independence... but we have been lulled into thinking that we need the permission of a powerful elite to secure it... we do not.
We have become confused about our identity and our nationhood - we no longer understand the purpose of our constitution and the rule-of-law. Some of us have been fooled into thinking of ourselves as European, a universal description with as much meaning as calling ourselves earthlings. We are British – English, Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish. We have amongst us people from every country on earth, here to share in what is unique to these islands and the British people – a nation of tolerance, compassion, fortitude, fair play and justice. We have taken these values to the world – and it seems that the time has come to do so again.
Our future will not be determined by a political party, it will not be determined by puppets like Clegg, Cameron or Brown (remember him?)... our future will be forged by those amongst us who find the courage to stand up for our rights and declare them to the world.
The tyranny that has been build up around us will crumble when we stand up and defend ourselves. This is a game of numbers... when there are more of us than there are of them... the job will be done.
Sunday, 15 January 2012
Smart Meters -
Smart Meters - PG&E Blinks After Lawsuit Is Filed
By Cassandra Anderson
1-14-12
|
Sunday, 8 January 2012
Is this our get out clause?
Friday night fun
Posted by Laura Kuenssberg. 6 January, 2012
Posted by Laura Kuenssberg. 6 January, 2012
For those who like nothing more than poring over the detail of complicated legalese, then the full text of the latest draft of the treaty that will pull Eurozone economies closer together, essentially giving wise spending Germany more control over the rest of the continent is below.
If you have more fun ways planned to spend your Friday evening, then I’ll forgive you, and tell you the two things that jump out at me.
The last paragraph appears on first reading, the most significant -
.”Within five years at most following the entry into force of this Treaty, on the basis of an assessment of the experience with its implementation, an initiative shall be launched, in compliance
with the provisions of the Treaty on the European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union, with the aim of incorporating the substance of this Treaty into the legal framework
of the European Union”
It seems whatever the PM’s position was, the rest of the Eurozone, at least those drafting the treaty, are looking at making every single country in the union, not just those in the single currency, sign up to rules that would allow more scrutiny, or interference, depending how you look at it, of each other’s budgets and policies. The aim in this document is to do this after five years, after the arrangements have been reviewed. This could of course also operate as a sunset clause, that could potentially allow a get out after the same period.
It also seems that there is a plan afoot to raise the level of deficit that the first draft was designed to allow. The original plan was that countries who signed up would only be allowed to run deficits of 0.5% of their GDP, the total amount of everything they make and produce. This draft includes the possibility of deficits running at 1%, although there would be tougher sanctions for those who break the rules.
In any case reading through the draft makes clear how far reaching the changes are, and far the rest of the continent could pull away from the UK if it goes through. This draft is still that, a draft, but there is very real change on the way.
PS For the many who have applauded the stance the PM has taken so far, and there are very many, don’t there don’t be mistaken that there are very real risks too. There are fearful rumblings from City sources I’ve been speaking to in the last couple of days. I’m told that big financial firms are starting to pull away from using the UK’s official representatives in Brussels, UKRep, choosing instead to go direct to talk to other countries’ teams, because ‘no one wants to be wrapped in the union flag right now’. There are suggestions that one very significant financial institution is moving away from describing itself as a UK institution, instead choosing to emphasise itself as a ‘global brand’. Another source told me even Poland, who the UK has often built alliances with is starting to drift away, some saying privately they can’t do business with the UK anymore. And I’ve been struck by the shock that some still feel at the tactic the PM chose. Not least by a source who attended a meeting with a senior minister on the day of the summit itself, who was told that the negotiating position was ‘very soft’. The same source was shocked when next morning it emerged that David Cameron had used the veto – ‘he didn’t protect us while he left the room’, and ‘he stopped the eurozone from sorting itself out’, comparing his stance to Mrs Thatcher’s on Europe, ’she was intelligent enough to stay in the room…he left, and shot himself in the foot’. Ouch! In reality the whole situation is so uncertain that it’s impossible to predict the eventual impact the PM’s position will have but the domestic political success it has brought him is not without its risks.
Here is the full draft – if you spot anything I’ve missed then tweet me at @ITVLauraK
__________
DRAFT
INTERNATIONAL TREATY ON A [REINFORCED ECONOMIC UNION]
THE CONTRACTING PARTIES………..
[CONSCIOUS of the obligation of the Contracting Parties, as Member States of the European
Union, to regard their economic policies as a matter of common concern,
DESIRING to promote conditions for stronger economic growth in the European Union and, to that
end, to develop ever-closer coordination of economic policies within the euro area,
BEARING IN MIND that the coordination of the economic policies of the Contracting Parties, as
Member States of the European Union, is based on the objective of sound and sustainable
government finances as a means of strengthening the conditions for price stability and for strong
sustainable growth underpinned by financial stability, thereby supporting the achievement of the
Union's objectives for sustainable growth and employment,
BEARING IN MIND that the need for governments to prevent a government deficit becoming
excessive is of an essential importance to safeguard the stability of the euro area as a whole, and
accordingly requires the introduction of specific rules to address this need, including the need to
take necessary corrective action,
CONSCIOUS of the need to ensure that their deficits remain below 3 % of their gross domestic
product at market prices and that government debt is below, or sufficiently declining towards, 60 %
of their gross domestic product at market prices,
RECALLING that the Contracting Parties, as Member States of the European Union, should refrain
from adopting any measure which could jeopardise the attainment of the Union's objectives in the
framework of the economic union, notably the practice of accumulating debt outside the general
government accounts,
BEARING IN MIND that the Heads of State or Government of the euro area Member States agreed
on 9 December 2011 on a reinforced architecture for Economic and Monetary Union, building upon
the European Treaties and facilitating the implementation of measures taken on the basis of Articles
121, 126 and 136 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
2
BEARING IN MIND that the objective of the Heads of State or Government of the euro area
Member States and of other Member States of the European Union remains to incorporate the
provisions of this Agreement as soon as possible into the Treaties on which the European Union is
founded,
TAKING NOTE, in this context, of the intention of the European Commission to present further
legislative proposals within the framework of the Union Treaties regarding a mechanism of ex ante
reporting of debt issuance plans of the Member States of the European Union, a procedure of
economic partnership programmes detailing structural reforms for euro area Member States in
excessive deficit procedure as well as a new coordination procedure at the level of the euro area for
major economic policy reform plans,
TAKING NOTE that, when reviewing and monitoring the budgetary commitments under this
Agreement, the European Commission will act within the framework of its powers as provided by
the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union, in particular Articles 121, 126 and 136
thereof,
NOTING in particular that, for the application of the budgetary "Balanced Budget Rule" described
in Article 3 of this Agreement, this monitoring will be made through the setting up of country
specific reference values and of calendars of convergence, as appropriate, for each Contracting
Party,
NOTING that compliance with the obligation to transpose the "Balanced Budget Rule" into national
legal systems at constitutional or equivalent level should be subject to the jurisdiction of the Court
of Justice of the European Union, in accordance with Article 273 of the Treaty on the Functioning
of the European Union,
RECALLING the need to facilitate the adoption of measures under the excessive deficit procedure
of the European Union for euro area Contracting Parties whose planned or actual government
deficit to gross domestic product exceeds 3%, whilst strongly reinforcing the objective of that
procedure, namely to encourage and, if necessary, compel the Member State concerned to reduce a
deficit which might be identified,
RECALLING the need for those Contracting Parties whose government debt exceeds the 60 %
reference value to reduce it at an average rate of one twentieth per year as a benchmark,
RECALLING the agreement of the Heads of State or Government of the euro area Member States
on 26 October 2011 to improve the governance of the euro area, including the holding of at least
two Euro Summit meetings per year, as well as the endorsement of the Euro Plus Pact by the Heads
of State or Government of the euro area Member States and of other Member States of the
European Union on 25 March 2011,
3
STRESSING the importance of the Treaty establishing the European Stability Mechanism as an
element of a global strategy to strengthen the Economic and Monetary Union,]
HAVE AGREED UPON the following provisions,
TITLE I
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
Article 1
1. By this Treaty, the Contracting Parties, as Member States of the European Union, agree on a
“fiscal compact” and on a stronger coordination of economic policies, involving an enhanced
governance to foster fiscal discipline and deeper integration in the internal market as well as
stronger growth, enhanced competitiveness and social cohesion.
2. The provisions of this Treaty shall apply to the Contracting Parties whose currency is the
euro. They may also apply to the other Contracting Parties, under the conditions set out in Article
14.
TITLE II
CONSISTENCY AND RELATIONSHIP WITH THE LAW OF THE UNION
Article 2
1. This Treaty shall be applied by the Contracting Parties in conformity with the Treaties on
which the European Union is founded, in particular Article 4(3) of the Treaty on European Union,
and with European Union law.
2. The provisions of this Treaty shall apply insofar as they are compatible with the Treaties on
which the Union is founded and with European Union law. They shall not encroach upon the
competences of the Union to act in the area of the economic union. In accordance with the case law
of the Court of Justice of the European Union, European Union law has precedence over the
provisions of this Treaty.
4
TITLE III
FISCAL COMPACT
Article 3
1. The Contracting Parties shall apply the following rules, in addition to and without prejudice
to the obligations derived from Union Law:
a) The budgetary position of the general government shall be balanced or in surplus. The
Contracting Parties may temporarily incur deficits only to take into account the budgetary
impact of the economic cycle and, beyond such impact, in case of exceptional economic
circumstances, or in periods of a severe economic downturn, provided that this does not
endanger fiscal sustainability in medium term.
b) The rule under point a) above shall be deemed to be respected if the annual structural deficit
of the general government does not exceed a country-specific reference value, that is in line
with the country-specific medium-term objective referred to in Article 2(a) of Regulation
(EC) No. 1466/97, as amended by Regulation (EC) No. 1175/2011, and which ensures an
adequate safety margin with respect to the 3 % reference value mentioned under Article 1 of
the Protocol (No 12) on the excessive deficit procedure annexed to the Treaty on European
Union and to the TFEU (hereinafter ‘Protocol No 12′) as well as rapid progress towards
fiscal sustainability, also taking into account the budgetary impact of ageing. The
Contracting Parties shall ensure convergence towards their respective country-specific
reference value. The country specific reference value shall not exceed 0.5 % of nominal
GDP.
c) Where the debt level is significantly below the 60 % reference value mentioned under
Article 1 of Protocol No 12, the country-specific reference value for the annual structural net
deficit may take a higher value than specified under point b), but in any case no more than
1.0% of nominal GDP .
2. The rules mentioned under paragraph 1 shall be introduced in national binding provisions of
a constitutional or equivalent nature. The Contracting Parties shall in particular put in place at
national level and on the basis of commonly agreed principles, a correction mechanism to be
triggered automatically in the event of significant deviations from the reference value or the
adjustment path towards it, as specified under the law of the Union. . It shall include the obligation
of the Contracting Parties to implement a programme to correct the deviations over a defined period
of time. It shall fully respect responsibilities of national Parliaments.
3. For the purposes of this Article, definitions set out in Article 2 of Protocol No 12 shall
apply. In addition, “annual structural deficit of the general government” refers to the annual
cyclically-adjusted deficit net of one-off and temporary measures.
(exit exceptional circumstances definition)
5
Article 4
When the ratio of their general government debt to gross domestic product exceeds the 60 %
reference value mentioned under Article 1 of Protocol No 12, the Contracting Parties shallreduce it
at an average rate of one twentieth per year as a benchmark, as provided for in Article 2(1a) of
Regulation (EC) No. 1467/97 as amended by Regulation (EC) No. 1177/2011.
Article 5
1. The Contracting Parties that are subject to an excessive deficit procedure under the Union
Treaties shall put in place a budgetary and economic partnership programme including a
detailed description of the structural reforms necessary to ensure an effectively durable
correction of their excessive deficits. The content and format of these programmes shall be
defined in the law of the Union. They shall be submitted to the European Commission and
the Council for endorsement.
2. The implementation of the programme, and the yearly budgetary plans consistent with it,
will be monitored by the Commission and by the Council.
Article 6
The Contracting Parties shall coordinate their national debt issuance. For that purpose, they shall
report ex-ante on their national debt issuance plans to the European Commission and to the Council.
Article 7
While fully respecting the procedural requirements of the Union Treaties, the Contracting Parties
whose currency is the euro undertake to support the proposals or recommendations put forward by
the European Commission where a Member State whose currency is the euro is recognised by the
European Commission to be in breach of the deficit or debt criterion in the framework of an
excessive deficit procedure, unless a qualified majority of them is of another view. A qualified
majority shall be defined by analogy with Article 238(3)(a) TFEU and with Article 3 of Protocol N°
36 to the EU Treaties on transitional provisions and without taking into account the position of the
Contracting Party concerned.
Article 8
Any Contracting Party which considers that another Contracting Party has failed to comply with
Title III may bring the matter before the Court of Justice of the European Union. The European
6
Commission may, on behalf of Contracting Parties, bring an action for an alleged infringement of
Title III before the Court of Justice of the European Union. The judgment of the Court of Justice of
the European Union shall be binding on the parties in the procedure, which shall take the necessary
measures to comply with the judgment within a period to be decided by said Court. The
implementation of the rules put in place by the Contracting Parties to comply with Article 3(2) will
be subject to the review of the national Courts of the Contracting Parties.
TITLE IV
ECONOMIC COORDINATION
Article 9
Building upon the economic policy coordination as defined in the Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union, the Contracting Parties undertake to work jointly towards an economic policy
fostering the smooth functioning of the Economic and Monetary Union and economic growth
through enhanced convergence and competitiveness. In this context, particular attention shall be
paid to all developments which, if allowed to persist, might threaten stability, competitiveness and
future growth and job creation. To this aim, they will take all necessary actions, including through
the Euro Plus Pact.
Article 10
In accordance with the procedural requirements of the Union Treaties, the Contracting Parties
undertake to make recourse, whenever appropriate and necessary, to measures specific to those
Member States whose currency is the euro as provided for in article 136 TFEU and to the enhanced
cooperation on matters that are essential for the smooth functioning of the euro area, without
undermining the internal market.
Article 11
With a view to benchmarking best practices, the Contracting Parties ensure that all major economic
policy reforms that they plan to undertake will be discussed ex-ante and, where appropriate,
coordinated among themselves. This coordination shall involve the institutions of the European
Union as required by the law of the Union.
exit art12, devient art. 13 idem
7
TITLE V
GOVERNANCE
Article 12
1. The Heads of State or Government of the Contracting Parties whose currency is the euro,
(hereinafter “the euro area Heads of State or Government”), the president of the European
Commission, the president of the Euro Group and the Commissioner responsible for Economic and
Monetary Affairs shall meet informally in Euro Summit meetings. The President of the European
Central Bank shall be invited to take part in such meetings. The President of the Euro Summit shall
be appointed by the euro area Heads of State or Government by simple majority at the same time
the European Council elects its President and for the same term of office.
2. Euro Summit meetings shall take place, when necessary, and at least twice a year, to discuss
questions related to the specific responsibilities those Member States share with regard to the single
currency, other issues concerning the governance of the euro area and the rules that apply to it, and
in particular strategic orientations for the conduct of economic policies and for improved
competitiveness and increased convergence in the euro area.
3. Euro Summit meetings shall be prepared by the President of the Euro Summit, in close
cooperation with the President of the European Commission, and by the Euro Group. The follow-up
to the meetings shall be ensured in the same manner.
4. The President of the Euro Summit shall keep the other Member States of the European
Union closely informed of the preparation and outcome of the Euro Summit meetings. The
President will also inform the European Parliament of the outcome of the Euro Summit meetings.
Article 13
Representatives of the competent Committees within the Parliaments of the Contracting Parties will
be invited to meet regularly to discuss in particular the conduct of economic and budgetary policies,
in close association with representatives of the relevant Committee of the European Parliament.
TITLE VI
GENERAL AND FINAL PROVISIONS
Article 14
8
1. This Treaty shall be ratified by the Contracting Parties in accordance with their respective
constitutional requirements. The instruments of ratification shall be deposited with the General
Secretariat of the Council of the European Union.
2. This Treaty shall enter into force on the first day of the month following the deposit of the
fifteenth instrument of ratification by a Contracting Party whose currency is the euro.
3. This Treaty shall apply as from the day of entry into force amongst the Contracting Parties
whose currency is the euro and which have ratified it. It shall apply to the other Contracting Parties
whose currency is the euro as from the first day of the month following the deposit of their
respective instrument of ratification.
4. By derogation to Paragraph 3, Title V of this Treaty shall apply to all Contracting Parties
whose currency is the euro as from the date of the entry into force of the Treaty.
5. This Treaty shall apply to the Contracting Parties with a derogation as defined in
Article 139(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, or with an exemption as
defined in Protocol No 16 on certain provisions related to Denmark annexed to the Union Treaties,
which have ratified it, as from the day when the decision abrogating that derogation or exemption
takes effect, unless the Contracting Party concerned declares its intention to be bound at an earlier
date by all or part of the provisions in Titles III and IV of this Treaty.
6. Within five years at most following the entry into force of this Treaty, on the basis of an
assessment of the experience with its implementation, an initiative shall be launched, in compliance
with the provisions of the Treaty on the European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union, with the aim of incorporating the substance of this Treaty into the legal framework
of the European Union.
__________
If you have more fun ways planned to spend your Friday evening, then I’ll forgive you, and tell you the two things that jump out at me.
The last paragraph appears on first reading, the most significant -
.”Within five years at most following the entry into force of this Treaty, on the basis of an assessment of the experience with its implementation, an initiative shall be launched, in compliance
with the provisions of the Treaty on the European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union, with the aim of incorporating the substance of this Treaty into the legal framework
of the European Union”
It seems whatever the PM’s position was, the rest of the Eurozone, at least those drafting the treaty, are looking at making every single country in the union, not just those in the single currency, sign up to rules that would allow more scrutiny, or interference, depending how you look at it, of each other’s budgets and policies. The aim in this document is to do this after five years, after the arrangements have been reviewed. This could of course also operate as a sunset clause, that could potentially allow a get out after the same period.
It also seems that there is a plan afoot to raise the level of deficit that the first draft was designed to allow. The original plan was that countries who signed up would only be allowed to run deficits of 0.5% of their GDP, the total amount of everything they make and produce. This draft includes the possibility of deficits running at 1%, although there would be tougher sanctions for those who break the rules.
In any case reading through the draft makes clear how far reaching the changes are, and far the rest of the continent could pull away from the UK if it goes through. This draft is still that, a draft, but there is very real change on the way.
PS For the many who have applauded the stance the PM has taken so far, and there are very many, don’t there don’t be mistaken that there are very real risks too. There are fearful rumblings from City sources I’ve been speaking to in the last couple of days. I’m told that big financial firms are starting to pull away from using the UK’s official representatives in Brussels, UKRep, choosing instead to go direct to talk to other countries’ teams, because ‘no one wants to be wrapped in the union flag right now’. There are suggestions that one very significant financial institution is moving away from describing itself as a UK institution, instead choosing to emphasise itself as a ‘global brand’. Another source told me even Poland, who the UK has often built alliances with is starting to drift away, some saying privately they can’t do business with the UK anymore. And I’ve been struck by the shock that some still feel at the tactic the PM chose. Not least by a source who attended a meeting with a senior minister on the day of the summit itself, who was told that the negotiating position was ‘very soft’. The same source was shocked when next morning it emerged that David Cameron had used the veto – ‘he didn’t protect us while he left the room’, and ‘he stopped the eurozone from sorting itself out’, comparing his stance to Mrs Thatcher’s on Europe, ’she was intelligent enough to stay in the room…he left, and shot himself in the foot’. Ouch! In reality the whole situation is so uncertain that it’s impossible to predict the eventual impact the PM’s position will have but the domestic political success it has brought him is not without its risks.
Here is the full draft – if you spot anything I’ve missed then tweet me at @ITVLauraK
__________
DRAFT
INTERNATIONAL TREATY ON A [REINFORCED ECONOMIC UNION]
THE CONTRACTING PARTIES………..
[CONSCIOUS of the obligation of the Contracting Parties, as Member States of the European
Union, to regard their economic policies as a matter of common concern,
DESIRING to promote conditions for stronger economic growth in the European Union and, to that
end, to develop ever-closer coordination of economic policies within the euro area,
BEARING IN MIND that the coordination of the economic policies of the Contracting Parties, as
Member States of the European Union, is based on the objective of sound and sustainable
government finances as a means of strengthening the conditions for price stability and for strong
sustainable growth underpinned by financial stability, thereby supporting the achievement of the
Union's objectives for sustainable growth and employment,
BEARING IN MIND that the need for governments to prevent a government deficit becoming
excessive is of an essential importance to safeguard the stability of the euro area as a whole, and
accordingly requires the introduction of specific rules to address this need, including the need to
take necessary corrective action,
CONSCIOUS of the need to ensure that their deficits remain below 3 % of their gross domestic
product at market prices and that government debt is below, or sufficiently declining towards, 60 %
of their gross domestic product at market prices,
RECALLING that the Contracting Parties, as Member States of the European Union, should refrain
from adopting any measure which could jeopardise the attainment of the Union's objectives in the
framework of the economic union, notably the practice of accumulating debt outside the general
government accounts,
BEARING IN MIND that the Heads of State or Government of the euro area Member States agreed
on 9 December 2011 on a reinforced architecture for Economic and Monetary Union, building upon
the European Treaties and facilitating the implementation of measures taken on the basis of Articles
121, 126 and 136 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
2
BEARING IN MIND that the objective of the Heads of State or Government of the euro area
Member States and of other Member States of the European Union remains to incorporate the
provisions of this Agreement as soon as possible into the Treaties on which the European Union is
founded,
TAKING NOTE, in this context, of the intention of the European Commission to present further
legislative proposals within the framework of the Union Treaties regarding a mechanism of ex ante
reporting of debt issuance plans of the Member States of the European Union, a procedure of
economic partnership programmes detailing structural reforms for euro area Member States in
excessive deficit procedure as well as a new coordination procedure at the level of the euro area for
major economic policy reform plans,
TAKING NOTE that, when reviewing and monitoring the budgetary commitments under this
Agreement, the European Commission will act within the framework of its powers as provided by
the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union, in particular Articles 121, 126 and 136
thereof,
NOTING in particular that, for the application of the budgetary "Balanced Budget Rule" described
in Article 3 of this Agreement, this monitoring will be made through the setting up of country
specific reference values and of calendars of convergence, as appropriate, for each Contracting
Party,
NOTING that compliance with the obligation to transpose the "Balanced Budget Rule" into national
legal systems at constitutional or equivalent level should be subject to the jurisdiction of the Court
of Justice of the European Union, in accordance with Article 273 of the Treaty on the Functioning
of the European Union,
RECALLING the need to facilitate the adoption of measures under the excessive deficit procedure
of the European Union for euro area Contracting Parties whose planned or actual government
deficit to gross domestic product exceeds 3%, whilst strongly reinforcing the objective of that
procedure, namely to encourage and, if necessary, compel the Member State concerned to reduce a
deficit which might be identified,
RECALLING the need for those Contracting Parties whose government debt exceeds the 60 %
reference value to reduce it at an average rate of one twentieth per year as a benchmark,
RECALLING the agreement of the Heads of State or Government of the euro area Member States
on 26 October 2011 to improve the governance of the euro area, including the holding of at least
two Euro Summit meetings per year, as well as the endorsement of the Euro Plus Pact by the Heads
of State or Government of the euro area Member States and of other Member States of the
European Union on 25 March 2011,
3
STRESSING the importance of the Treaty establishing the European Stability Mechanism as an
element of a global strategy to strengthen the Economic and Monetary Union,]
HAVE AGREED UPON the following provisions,
TITLE I
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
Article 1
1. By this Treaty, the Contracting Parties, as Member States of the European Union, agree on a
“fiscal compact” and on a stronger coordination of economic policies, involving an enhanced
governance to foster fiscal discipline and deeper integration in the internal market as well as
stronger growth, enhanced competitiveness and social cohesion.
2. The provisions of this Treaty shall apply to the Contracting Parties whose currency is the
euro. They may also apply to the other Contracting Parties, under the conditions set out in Article
14.
TITLE II
CONSISTENCY AND RELATIONSHIP WITH THE LAW OF THE UNION
Article 2
1. This Treaty shall be applied by the Contracting Parties in conformity with the Treaties on
which the European Union is founded, in particular Article 4(3) of the Treaty on European Union,
and with European Union law.
2. The provisions of this Treaty shall apply insofar as they are compatible with the Treaties on
which the Union is founded and with European Union law. They shall not encroach upon the
competences of the Union to act in the area of the economic union. In accordance with the case law
of the Court of Justice of the European Union, European Union law has precedence over the
provisions of this Treaty.
4
TITLE III
FISCAL COMPACT
Article 3
1. The Contracting Parties shall apply the following rules, in addition to and without prejudice
to the obligations derived from Union Law:
a) The budgetary position of the general government shall be balanced or in surplus. The
Contracting Parties may temporarily incur deficits only to take into account the budgetary
impact of the economic cycle and, beyond such impact, in case of exceptional economic
circumstances, or in periods of a severe economic downturn, provided that this does not
endanger fiscal sustainability in medium term.
b) The rule under point a) above shall be deemed to be respected if the annual structural deficit
of the general government does not exceed a country-specific reference value, that is in line
with the country-specific medium-term objective referred to in Article 2(a) of Regulation
(EC) No. 1466/97, as amended by Regulation (EC) No. 1175/2011, and which ensures an
adequate safety margin with respect to the 3 % reference value mentioned under Article 1 of
the Protocol (No 12) on the excessive deficit procedure annexed to the Treaty on European
Union and to the TFEU (hereinafter ‘Protocol No 12′) as well as rapid progress towards
fiscal sustainability, also taking into account the budgetary impact of ageing. The
Contracting Parties shall ensure convergence towards their respective country-specific
reference value. The country specific reference value shall not exceed 0.5 % of nominal
GDP.
c) Where the debt level is significantly below the 60 % reference value mentioned under
Article 1 of Protocol No 12, the country-specific reference value for the annual structural net
deficit may take a higher value than specified under point b), but in any case no more than
1.0% of nominal GDP .
2. The rules mentioned under paragraph 1 shall be introduced in national binding provisions of
a constitutional or equivalent nature. The Contracting Parties shall in particular put in place at
national level and on the basis of commonly agreed principles, a correction mechanism to be
triggered automatically in the event of significant deviations from the reference value or the
adjustment path towards it, as specified under the law of the Union. . It shall include the obligation
of the Contracting Parties to implement a programme to correct the deviations over a defined period
of time. It shall fully respect responsibilities of national Parliaments.
3. For the purposes of this Article, definitions set out in Article 2 of Protocol No 12 shall
apply. In addition, “annual structural deficit of the general government” refers to the annual
cyclically-adjusted deficit net of one-off and temporary measures.
(exit exceptional circumstances definition)
5
Article 4
When the ratio of their general government debt to gross domestic product exceeds the 60 %
reference value mentioned under Article 1 of Protocol No 12, the Contracting Parties shallreduce it
at an average rate of one twentieth per year as a benchmark, as provided for in Article 2(1a) of
Regulation (EC) No. 1467/97 as amended by Regulation (EC) No. 1177/2011.
Article 5
1. The Contracting Parties that are subject to an excessive deficit procedure under the Union
Treaties shall put in place a budgetary and economic partnership programme including a
detailed description of the structural reforms necessary to ensure an effectively durable
correction of their excessive deficits. The content and format of these programmes shall be
defined in the law of the Union. They shall be submitted to the European Commission and
the Council for endorsement.
2. The implementation of the programme, and the yearly budgetary plans consistent with it,
will be monitored by the Commission and by the Council.
Article 6
The Contracting Parties shall coordinate their national debt issuance. For that purpose, they shall
report ex-ante on their national debt issuance plans to the European Commission and to the Council.
Article 7
While fully respecting the procedural requirements of the Union Treaties, the Contracting Parties
whose currency is the euro undertake to support the proposals or recommendations put forward by
the European Commission where a Member State whose currency is the euro is recognised by the
European Commission to be in breach of the deficit or debt criterion in the framework of an
excessive deficit procedure, unless a qualified majority of them is of another view. A qualified
majority shall be defined by analogy with Article 238(3)(a) TFEU and with Article 3 of Protocol N°
36 to the EU Treaties on transitional provisions and without taking into account the position of the
Contracting Party concerned.
Article 8
Any Contracting Party which considers that another Contracting Party has failed to comply with
Title III may bring the matter before the Court of Justice of the European Union. The European
6
Commission may, on behalf of Contracting Parties, bring an action for an alleged infringement of
Title III before the Court of Justice of the European Union. The judgment of the Court of Justice of
the European Union shall be binding on the parties in the procedure, which shall take the necessary
measures to comply with the judgment within a period to be decided by said Court. The
implementation of the rules put in place by the Contracting Parties to comply with Article 3(2) will
be subject to the review of the national Courts of the Contracting Parties.
TITLE IV
ECONOMIC COORDINATION
Article 9
Building upon the economic policy coordination as defined in the Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union, the Contracting Parties undertake to work jointly towards an economic policy
fostering the smooth functioning of the Economic and Monetary Union and economic growth
through enhanced convergence and competitiveness. In this context, particular attention shall be
paid to all developments which, if allowed to persist, might threaten stability, competitiveness and
future growth and job creation. To this aim, they will take all necessary actions, including through
the Euro Plus Pact.
Article 10
In accordance with the procedural requirements of the Union Treaties, the Contracting Parties
undertake to make recourse, whenever appropriate and necessary, to measures specific to those
Member States whose currency is the euro as provided for in article 136 TFEU and to the enhanced
cooperation on matters that are essential for the smooth functioning of the euro area, without
undermining the internal market.
Article 11
With a view to benchmarking best practices, the Contracting Parties ensure that all major economic
policy reforms that they plan to undertake will be discussed ex-ante and, where appropriate,
coordinated among themselves. This coordination shall involve the institutions of the European
Union as required by the law of the Union.
exit art12, devient art. 13 idem
7
TITLE V
GOVERNANCE
Article 12
1. The Heads of State or Government of the Contracting Parties whose currency is the euro,
(hereinafter “the euro area Heads of State or Government”), the president of the European
Commission, the president of the Euro Group and the Commissioner responsible for Economic and
Monetary Affairs shall meet informally in Euro Summit meetings. The President of the European
Central Bank shall be invited to take part in such meetings. The President of the Euro Summit shall
be appointed by the euro area Heads of State or Government by simple majority at the same time
the European Council elects its President and for the same term of office.
2. Euro Summit meetings shall take place, when necessary, and at least twice a year, to discuss
questions related to the specific responsibilities those Member States share with regard to the single
currency, other issues concerning the governance of the euro area and the rules that apply to it, and
in particular strategic orientations for the conduct of economic policies and for improved
competitiveness and increased convergence in the euro area.
3. Euro Summit meetings shall be prepared by the President of the Euro Summit, in close
cooperation with the President of the European Commission, and by the Euro Group. The follow-up
to the meetings shall be ensured in the same manner.
4. The President of the Euro Summit shall keep the other Member States of the European
Union closely informed of the preparation and outcome of the Euro Summit meetings. The
President will also inform the European Parliament of the outcome of the Euro Summit meetings.
Article 13
Representatives of the competent Committees within the Parliaments of the Contracting Parties will
be invited to meet regularly to discuss in particular the conduct of economic and budgetary policies,
in close association with representatives of the relevant Committee of the European Parliament.
TITLE VI
GENERAL AND FINAL PROVISIONS
Article 14
8
1. This Treaty shall be ratified by the Contracting Parties in accordance with their respective
constitutional requirements. The instruments of ratification shall be deposited with the General
Secretariat of the Council of the European Union.
2. This Treaty shall enter into force on the first day of the month following the deposit of the
fifteenth instrument of ratification by a Contracting Party whose currency is the euro.
3. This Treaty shall apply as from the day of entry into force amongst the Contracting Parties
whose currency is the euro and which have ratified it. It shall apply to the other Contracting Parties
whose currency is the euro as from the first day of the month following the deposit of their
respective instrument of ratification.
4. By derogation to Paragraph 3, Title V of this Treaty shall apply to all Contracting Parties
whose currency is the euro as from the date of the entry into force of the Treaty.
5. This Treaty shall apply to the Contracting Parties with a derogation as defined in
Article 139(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, or with an exemption as
defined in Protocol No 16 on certain provisions related to Denmark annexed to the Union Treaties,
which have ratified it, as from the day when the decision abrogating that derogation or exemption
takes effect, unless the Contracting Party concerned declares its intention to be bound at an earlier
date by all or part of the provisions in Titles III and IV of this Treaty.
6. Within five years at most following the entry into force of this Treaty, on the basis of an
assessment of the experience with its implementation, an initiative shall be launched, in compliance
with the provisions of the Treaty on the European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union, with the aim of incorporating the substance of this Treaty into the legal framework
of the European Union.
__________
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)