Chairman of newly selected commission Joe O'Toole should resign says Anti Austerity Alliance

The Anti-Austerity Alliance has called for newly appointed chairman of the Water Commission Joe O’Toole to resign from his position saying that he is clearly biased in favour of water charges and therefore unfit to chair the commission.

Newly selected chairperson of Irish Government's Water Commission Joe O'Toole

In the interview on Newstalk this morning, O’Toole said that ‘central taxation is not enough to pay for it’, that the Commission was a ‘political exercise’, which would look for a solution which would ‘have enough sugar on it to make the medicine go down easily’ after the result of the general election which saw 70% of TDs returned to the Dáil who were either in favour of scrapping water charges or suspending them.

Paul Murphy TD said “After Joe O’Toole’s comments on Newstalk this morning, his appointment and position as the chairman of the Water Commission is now completely untenable.

“The interview which he gave this morning shows that he is clearly in favour of water charges and biased. He clearly rejects the idea of paying for the provision of water through central taxation and is therefore in favour of charges.

“His comments that he would be looking at ‘the work Revenue have done and would draw on that’ fundamentally exposes that for him this is about how you collect water charges rather than whether charging is the correct model.

“This fatally undermines his position when the reason for the setting up of this commission has been that through mass protest, boycott and the elections people have rejected charging for water.

Mick Barry TD said “Joe O’Toole’s previous comments on water charges in the Seanad show that he is unsuitable to chair the Commission.

“As early as 2010, he had welcomed a proposal by Siemens to provide water meters which would be funded through water charges. He is a safe pair of hands for the government and Simon Coveney to deliver the verdict they want on the need for water charges.

“He also said that this was a ‘political exercise’ to find a method of having ‘enough sugar’ on water charges for people to accept them. For us and the vast majority of people, this Commission has no credibility. It has been set up to get the result which the government wants. The Dáil was democratically elected four months ago and has a mandate to get rid of water charges and that is where the decision should be made”


The government has handpicked these 'water experts' to tell us what to do with Irish Water

AN EXPERT COMMISSION has been established to examine how Ireland should fund its domestic public water services.

The eight-person group will be chaired by former senator Joe O’Toole. They will be expected to report their recommendations to a special Oireachtas committee by the end of November.

Experts from across the globe have been called upon to give their insights into how the government should fix the Irish Water debacle.

They include the OECD’s environmental director Dr Xavier Leflaive and former Scottish minister Peter Peacock who currently chairs the Customer Forum for Water Scotland (where the average household pays about £339 per year for water).

Also on the new committee are Bill Emery, the chair of the Northern Ireland Utility Regulator; Brendan O’Mahony, the chair of the National Federation of Group Water Schemes; Sarah Hendry, an academic lawyer from the University of Dundee who specialises in water and environmental law; Dr Andrew Kelly, an environmental economist and founder of EnvEcon; and Gritta Nottelman, a strategy consultant for Waternet, the only water company in the Netherlands that is dedicated to the entire water cycle.

Minister Simon Coveney says he chose these people because they have the necessary professional experience to address the “complex issue” that is water charges in Ireland.

Once they report in November, that special committee will then have three months to decide what is the best course of action. Its recommendations will go to the entire Oireachtas by the end of February.

A vote on those final recommendations will be held by the end of March next year.

The commission, set up today, will be taking submissions from all interested parties, the government confirmed this afternoon.

It will consider the role of the regulator, Ireland’s environment obligations under domestic and international standards and the need to encourage water conservation.

The Commission is also tasked with assessing the maintenance and investment needs of the public water and waste water system and examining proposals on how the national utility in State ownership would be able to borrow to invest in water infrastructure.

Water charges have been suspended while this process is underway.

Original article; thejournal.ie, June 29, 2016


Tackling the EU Empire some basic critical facts

This is an extract from 'Tackling the EU Empire: basic critical facts on EU/Eurozone – a handbook for European Democrats', written by Anthony Coughlan.  The full document can be read on here web-site.

The National Platform EU Research and Information Centre is based in Ireland at 24 Crawford Avenue, Dublin 9. Tel.: +353 (0)1-830-5792. https://nationalplatform.org

EU IDEOLOGY – SUPRANATIONALISM

Supranationalism – from Latin supra,”above” – is where Nation States surrender their authority to a superior entity that rules them and has legal primacy over them, at least in the policy areas surrendered. An example is a multinational Federal State where sovereignty is divided between a superior federal level and inferior national or regional states. Such contemporary Federations as India, Pakistan, Russia or Nigeria are instances. Or it can refer to imperial arrangements like the Austro-Hungarian Empire, once known asa “prison-house of nations”, where different countries are ruled by a centralized bureaucracy in a far-away imperial capital.

The EU has features of both these forms of supranationalism. Supranationalism is the opposite of internationalism, which is a benign and progressive concept. Internationalism – from Latin inter, “between” – implies the pre-existence of sovereign Nation States. It refers to relations of co-operation between the States that constitute the international community, but with each controlling and deciding its own domestic and external affairs in accordance with the wishes of its people.  Recognition of States based on the right to self-determination of nations and peoples is a basic principle of modern democracy and international law.

Supranationalism, in contrast to internationalism, implies a hierarchy, with the supranational level on top. Internationalism implies legal and political equality between the parties. Properly understood, internationalism is opposed to all forms of chauvinism and xenophobia. It implies coexistence among progressive “nationalisms” – that is, broad nationalisms rather than narrow, using the positive rather than the negative sense of that word in English. It implies patriotism and love of country, combined with respect for the many national communities into which humanity is divided and admiration for their varied cultural and other achievements.

Internationalism delights in the diversity of nations. Supranationalism seeks to erode national differences, eitherbecause they threaten the dominance of a particular ruling power or they make it more difficult for transnational Big Business to establish a world of homogenized consumers and employees. Supranationalism seeks the erosion of State sovereignty. Internationalism seeks to establish and maintain it.

The glory of European civilisation has been the diversity of its national components – in culture, science, political institutions, economic actors, legal systems, education systems, tax codes,fashion. In classical Europe emulation and competition between nations, communities and individuals spurred creativity and innovation. They contrasted with the centralized empires of China, Japan, India and the Ottomans. The peak of Europe’s cultural achievements occurred when its political units were numerous and small – in Athenian Greece, Renaissance Italy, 17th century Netherlands, 18th century Germany.  This classical Europe, which is synonymous with much of what is best in human civilization, is the opposite of the centralised “Europe” of the Brussels bureaucracy, with its mania for imposing uniformity and “harmonization” by means of supranational laws.

EU supranationalism means rule by technocrats, supposed experts who are not elected, without democratic control. The EU Commission is a good example. Supranationalism leaves ordinary people cold. In the EU it means “Brussels talking to Brussels” as the elite groups concerned get ever more removed from citizen voters in the different national communities they come from. It means the governments of the bigger Member States using the EU’s supranational institutions to impose their hegemony on the smaller, while at the same time seeking to leverage the EU bloc as a whole into becoming a world power through which the government of each Big State hopes to wield more influence externally than it can ever do on its own. Lust for world power is the mainspring of EU supranationalism. National democracy is to be sacrificed to that end, while economic laissez-faire is made a constitutional imperative everywhere in the interest of powerful national economic elites, particularly those of the big countries.  Supranationalism and internationalism propose quite opposite visions of different ideal “Europes”.

Supranationalists seek to encourage the illusion that one must belong to a big political unit to be prosperous. That is false. There is no connection between size of country and peoples’ living standards. The richest countries in the world are mostly small. The two European countries with the highest standard of living for their populations are Norway and Switzerland – both independent and outside the EU.

The historical and moral guilt of those pushing the European “project” is great. They work to subvert the democracy and national independence of their own peoples and to transfer control of their societies to supranational elites with whom they identify and who reward them generously. Their own peoples meanwhile become disillusioned and depoliticized, while the economic prosperity they have been promised if they shift to supranationalism proves a mirage for many.

The European Union is the ghost of the real Europe. When it calls itself “Europe” and believes it is Europe it is acting out a fiction that future historians will surely compare to the fiction of the Holy Roman Empire, the ghost of imperial Rome, which the French philosopher Voltaire once said was neither holy, Roman nor an empire, and which for centuries spoke German and was ruled from Vienna.

Original article; Tackling the EU Empire: basic critical facts on EU/Eurozone – a handbook for European Democrats