We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
A LABOUR MEP has warned that proposals for a new European Union treaty aimed at ending the eurozone’s debt crisis could be rejected by the European Parliament.
Proinsias de Rossa, who will step down as an MEP for Dublin next month, has called on EU leaders to ensure that the deal currently being drafted in Brussels must place a greater focus on job creation, and ensure the European Parliament remains important, or MEPs could reject the new plan.
The warning came after over 500 MEPs backed a resolution at the European Parliament which questioned the need for the new treaty, arguing that its goals – specifically to ensure balanced national budgets – could be achieved through means already allowed for in EU law.
“We need to ensure that austerity measures are balanced with concrete action to promote solidarity and growth with jobs,” de Rossa said in a statement, calling on the treaty to protect the ‘community method’ which had served the EU well for 50 years.
This meant maintaining the balance of power between the Council (the group of EU heads of government), the European Commission, and the European Parliament – each of which had its own role to play in governing the EU.
“By definition, an inter-governmental or ’Europe of nation states’ will result in domination by the larger countries, which will inevitably lead to a disintegration of the EU given that the majority of states are small to medium sized,” de Rossa said.
De Rossa said the Socialists & Democrats group, of which Labour is a member, believed the inter-governmental treaty currently being drafted was avoidable.
“If the new treaty does not address the European Parliament’s fundamental concerns, we are ready to make use of all the political and legal instruments at our disposal to oppose this agreement,” he said.
The approval of MEPs is not strictly required to adopt a new treaty. In order to be adopted, the deal needs to be agreed by the Council – which is expected to come in two weeks – and be formally ratified by each member state through its parliament, or in Ireland’s case by referendum.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
And dump its financial crap on the taxpayer. But oh no we couldnt have mortgage write downs for regular home owners. The cost of this alone would probably give back financial control to thousands of people who made much less investment error than the so called professionals.
Exactly ! How much will this buy out cost us this time ?
Hopefully they now reduce their SVR by 1.5-2% so that I can spend some of my hard earned cash on myself and family
Hopefully the PTSB will now lower their disgraceful SVR to the same amount as the other state owned bank AIB.. this bank has got some amount of help from the government its the least they could do for us…
It’s a nice thought, but in reality PTSB don’t give a flying f€ck about the mortgage customers being screwed on their SVR and neither do the government.
I’d love to be proven wrong on this but I won’t be holding my breath and I say that as one of those customers.
So will the Government do the same for me? Take my debts, leave me with my assets and money and I can live happy ever after?
How worst off could we be if we just left these banks which are no different than any business, go under?
Move the trackers to IBRC or the “formerly known as Anglo” bank .. The same bank FG said they’d disband if we voted them in. Will they reduce the SVR now as it was kept high to pay for the costly trackers. Will it be trackers which are 0.5% -1% above ECB rate and still performing or just those in arrears? Either way the taxpayer is straddled with the burden while the bank can massage its books to look profitable.
have your say