Challenges Loom for Sweden’s E.U. Presidency

STOCKHOLM — The last time Sweden ran the European Union, eight years ago, its reign was a mostly quiet one, memorable only for a riot that marred a summit in Gothenburg. But as they assume the rotating presidency of the bloc again on Wednesday, Sweden’s leaders may feel nostalgic for those boring days of 2001.This Swedish presidency will be crucial for the E.U., the world’s largest trading bloc, and a portfolio of thorny issues await it. Chief among them is the fate of the Lisbon Treaty, the proposed new charter for the E.U., which many of its leaders feel is crucial for the Continent if it wants to increase its influence on the international stage.But many other challenges are looming.With economies stagnating, the Swedes will face resistance in trying to restore order to the continent’s battered public finances. There is also the issue of climate change and whether Europe can forge a consensus in advance of global talks in December.A wide array of foreign policy challenges confront the E.U. as well, ranging from a likely crisis over Russian gas supplies to fresh tensions with Iran.“You need to prepare for what you cannot foresee,” said Fredrik Reinfeldt, the Prime Minister of Sweden, on Tuesday, encapsulating the unmanageable nature of the task he faces.Hanging over it all is the crippling uncertainty created by a referendum in October, when Ireland votes for a second time on the Lisbon Treaty, which aims to streamline the E.U.’s complex and ramshackle structure.According to Thomas Klau, of the European Council on Foreign Relations, Lisbon is “the one big topic” for the Swedes. “And there is no way to know how that plays out,” he said.“As one Swedish diplomat said to me, ‘Swedes don’t like uncertainty, they like planning,”’ Mr. Klau added. “There is every uncertainty about the vote in Ireland and the result could produce two very different scenarios.”The Lisbon Treaty aims to change decision-making procedures and create a new permanent President of the European Council, where national governments meet.But to come into force all 27 nations must ratify it. That requires a “yes” vote in Ireland, the completion of ratification by Germany, and the assent of the presidents of the Czech Republic and Poland, both of whom dislike the treaty.Achieving this is a challenge for Sweden, a nation of 9.2 million people that joined the E.U. in 1995 but stayed outside the European single currency after voters rejected the idea of adopting the Euro in a referendum in 2003.In the months leading up to the Irish vote, the Swedes must avoid contentious initiatives, so as not to risk complicating the task of the Irish “yes” campaign. This policy paralysis is compounded by the legal uncertainty that the Lisbon vote creates. For example, negotiations on data exchange with the United States cannot be completed before October because the E.U.’s procedures will be changed if Lisbon is ratified.An Irish “no” in October would plunge the E.U. back into crisis.But if the treaty goes through, the Swedes will have only a matter of weeks to oversee the creation of a new E.U. diplomatic service and conduct an elaborate negotiation over new E.U. jobs.Advance discussions are difficult because suggestions that an Irish yes vote is being taken for granted could jeopardize the referendum. “That makes it very difficult to plan,” said one official speaking on condition of anonymity. “It has to be done in secret.”The Swedes will also need to handle the politically sensitive task of doling out appointments within the European Commission.At the same time they must negotiate an agreement among E.U. nations about how to finance a deal on climate change, and mollify eastern European nations that want wealthier neighbors to assume more of the burden. This will then be taken to the table in global talks in December.The backdrop, warned Mr. Reinfeldt, was a tough economic environment and a situation “where a lot of countries think that the climate issue is about getting more resources to their country and someone else should pay.”Meanwhile Sweden may clash with France over moves to reign in ballooning budget deficits. “We think that the line of pushing financial stimulus packages is exhausted and it is exit strategies we should be pushing more,” the Swedish Prime Minister said.The highest court in Germany has ruled that the Lisbon Treaty was compatible with German law, but said that changes to domestic legislation must be made before it can be formally ratified. The decision by the Constitutional Court creates a technical problem for the German government, which will now have to rush through new legislation to comply. Speaking in Stockholm, Carl Bildt, the foreign minister of Sweden, said his preliminary assessment was that the ruling would not create an obstacle to the entry into force of Lisbon.Irish times

Brian Cowen, the Irsih prime minister: 2nd October as the date when Ireland holds its second referendum on Lisbon

His admission came as Brian Cowen, the Irsih prime minister, was set to announce 2 October as the date when Ireland holds its second referendum on the document.
The treaty, which proposes the first full-time President of the European Council, is highly contentious and was rejected by the Irish in a referendum in June last year.
But current opinion polls suggest the Irish will vote Yes this time.
However, Mr McCreevy, the internal market commissioner, said that if the treaty had been put to a public vote, it would have been rejected by 95 per cent of the 27 member states.
The former Irish finance minister said: "When Irish people rejected the Treaty a year ago, the initial reaction ranged from shock to horror to temper to vexation. That would be the view of a lot of the people who live in the Brussels beltway.
"On the other hand, all of the political leaders know quite well that if a similar question was put to their electorate by a referendum, the answer in 95 per cent of the countries would probably have been 'No' as well.
"I have always divided the reaction between those two forces: those within the beltway, the 'fonctionnaires', those who gasp with horror, and on the other hand the heads of state who are far more realistic. They are glad they didn't have to put the question themselves to their people."
He said the Irish should not be ashamed about voting No, adding: "We might not like the result on occasion, but that's democracy, and we should not be ashamed of it."
Having reflected more deeply on the benefits of EU membership, he is hopeful the Irish will ratify the treaty in the autumn.
"Everybody says we do not know enough about Europe. But I can tell you that the ordinary people of Ireland know a damn sight more about the intricacies of the European framework than nearly all members of the other 27 states."
At an EU summit on 19 June, Ireland won legal guarantees on military neutrality and tax and family policies, and if there is a Yes vote in October, the hope is that EU leaders will then take decisions on the first full time President of the European Council, a new high representative for foreign and security policy, and on creating an External Action Service.
If the Irish vote No, the EU will be thrown into a new political crisis which will affect its decision-making capacity on all major issues.
Meanwhile, socialist members of the parliament in the Czech Republic are considering suspending the powers of the country's Eurosceptic President, Vaclav Klaus, on the grounds that he is "trying to act above the law".
Mr Klaus, a diehard opponent of the treaty, still has to sign off the document, even though it was ratified by the Czech parliament in May last year.
Alena Gajduskova, Czech Social Democrat MP, whose party has 29 of the 81 seats in parliament, said: "There is nothing in our constitution that gives the President the right to veto decisions of the country's highest institutions."
Mr Klaus has written to Jan Fischer, the Czech prime minister, stating that the Irish guarantees would have to be ratified by the Czech parliament or he (Klaus) would not sign the treaty.


By Martin Banks in Brussels

TDs learn not to distract revitalised Taoiseach

Happier days for an energised leader; a ‘moral’ victory and a mathematical defeat; moans and groans in corridors of power; some handy tips for George Lee; and a whirlwind tour of a legendary drinking hole
BRIAN COWEN is like a new man since he returned, flushed with success, from the European Council meeting in Brussels.
In the last week in particular, the Taoiseach has appeared more dynamic in his public and Dáil performances.
The Government has decided to adopt a more aggressive approach to dealing with the Opposition. The Taoiseach is to be more up-front and visible to voters. As the party slid to one of its worst performances ever in the recent elections, there were complaints about poor communications at leadership level and a view that the party seemed rudderless and drifting.
Recently though, Brian Cowen has appeared less swift to anger during Dáil exchanges. On Wednesday, even Opposition deputies were impressed by his passionate and articulate defence of the Lisbon Treaty.
He brought the FF parliamentary party meeting to an abrupt end on Tuesday night by barking at startled deputies that he doesn’t want them coming in week after week pestering him about various issues.
Biffo “exploded” when North Dublin’s Michael Kennedy brought up pharmacy licences during Any Other Business. He snapped that he doesn’t want to hear people coming in and raising distractions, when he has only one goal in mind and that is to get the country back on track. “And that’s that.”
Some deputies were quite impressed by this new sign of life.
Meanwhile, there have also been a few sightings of the Taoiseach in the canteen at lunchtime. In fact, he was there yesterday, another indication of the attempt at a more relaxed approach.
He did fine interview with Sean O’Rourke on yesterday’s News at One , standing up to Sean’s trademark robust questioning and putting in a confident and authoritative performance on the economy. One observer described his vigorous defence of the Government as similar to his interview with O’Rourke just before the last general election, when “he ate Richard Bruton for starters”.
But there’s more. He’ll be turning up for the final Questions and Answers programme on Monday night. And he’s back again in RTÉ next Saturday, when he will be a guest on the final transmission of Rodney Rice’s Saturday View radio show. Rodney is retiring after a long and distinguished broadcasting career.

Irish Times

Mujahid and Kamal response to the IFI statement

The issue of the Mosque finances not being disclosed for public scrutiny was brought up during the show by Mr. Liam (Mujahid) Egan. The Islamic Foundation of Ireland is a registered 'Friendly Society' and is a recognised charity. The accounts of the Islamic Foundation of Ireland for the year 2008 have already been submitted to the Registry of Friendly Societies. They were posted on the notice board in the Mosque a week before the Society's last annual general meeting, presented during the meeting and are always made available for inspection by the members of the Society as required.”
During the Liveline show, Mr Egan simply reiterated a comment made by the Imam during the IFI AGM . Is this comment made by the Imam now being denied? We would ask you to look up the word scrutiny. Posting up a list of items with totals does not constitute an examination and judging by the number of concerns expressed during the IFI AGM with regard to finances it would appear to have been an issue long before MPAC reported it. MPACIE will pursue the matter with the Registry of Friendly Societies as our email request to the IFI to see the accounts has remained unanswered.
As for Mr. Egan his continued unwarranted attack on the Imam is well documented.
Mr Egan and MPACIE have only sought accountability and transparency in all the affairs of our community, we would be interested to see in what way this Sunnah might be deemed an attack? Please respond!Many members of the Muslim community are aware of the grudges which both men hold who have been consistently causing difficulties. ... Mr. Egan’s allegations are frivolous, untrue, founded in ulterior motives, and should be totally disregarded as the words of disgruntled and disaffected persons. Accordingly their complaints should be treated with the contempt they deserve.
This shameful, disingenuous and libelous attempt to offset legitimate criticism is typical of those who have no defense. Is it not true that the Imam is also the Patron of the North Dublin Muslim School? Is it not true that the Imam acting as Patron has overseen systemic failures at that school? As was mentioned on the Liveline show, a CEO who oversaw such failures would have the decency to step down or he would be removed, but what are we treated to? Damage control, blame shifting and claims of ‘personal grudges’. Has the Imam apologized to the children who have suffered under his patronage? Has he begged forgiveness from the parents for simply not doing enough to give those kids a fair chance in their adult lives? Where is the public apology?
The IFI have made a number of serious statements and in the interests of fairness we will offer them a chance to reply:
1. Is the IFI denying that the Imam made the comment Mr Egan referred to on Liveline?2. What has Mr Egan said that is untrue?3. In what way does the Imam think he has been attacked by Mr Egan?4. What difficulties has Mr Egan caused?Please note that EVERYTHING Mr Egan and MPACIE have said is in the public domain, we believe in transparency!
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Kamel Ghanam's is here: I was both disappointed and surprised that the IFI has apparently chosen this disparaging attitude in their latest attempts to offset the growing criticism being levelled against the Patron who is also their President, Trustee, Chairman, and Imam.While I admit to having no qualification in evaluating scholastic standards, and that would place me on a par with Patron and many who now make up the current board of management including the Chairperson of the Board of Management etc. I do however have the most important qualification – that of a concerned parent. As a parent I feel adequately qualified to evaluate the standard of education imparted to my children previously when compared with the school they are attending now. I don’t believe I made any insinuations regarding the finances bar the fact that as a parent I and others simply haven’t seen any financial reports despite requests. Contrary to the improbability postulated by the IFI/Patron regarding statements by secondary school teachers – the recent WSE reports demonstrate that such incidences are indeed possible. I do not as yet have the experience of my children progressing to the second level school but I have been reliably informed by other parents of past pupils that when their children went to the secondary schools they encountered problems there.I believe the Muslim community is acutely aware of the growing concerns, and not merely on account of two people as you allege. My only motive in this affair is the future of our children. It is regrettable that the IFI/Patron has not demonstrated similar convictions. I do not believe that my comments were frivolous, or untrue. The only objective was to highlight our desire to improve our children’s education and future as good Irish citizens. Patron I challenge you to a live television debate!______________________________________________________________________________________________

Our calls for reform fail to blame our basic culture

We may be overlooking the nature of Ireland’s modus operandi when we yell for change, writes ELAINE BYRNE .
STOCKHOLM SYNDROME is a psychological response by kidnap victims who become sympathetic and loyal to their kidnappers. Hostages bond with the hostage taker as a basic survival strategy. Isolation induces the prisoner to adopt the captor’s mindset.
Is this phenomenon also known as Irish political culture? Are our political institutions trapped by a mindset which is angry but accepts the New York hip-hop philosophy of Run DMC: “It’s like that, and that’s the way it is!”
Trinity College Dublin and the Political Studies Association of Ireland hosted a conference yesterday to ask these questions: Are our Institutions Fit for Purpose? Political Reform in the Republic of Ireland.
The objective of the conference was to provide a forum for Ireland’s leading political scientists, political commentators and interested practitioners to discuss their views on political reform. Jane Suiter, Matt Wall, both PhD scholars at Trinity, and I sat down over a cup of coffee a few weeks ago to organise the conference. By presenting accessible, informed and dispassionate analysis to a wider public, we innocently hope to motivate public participation as part of a process to drive institutional change.
There are no silver bullets or quick fixes but rather a cocktail of experiences which will emerge as part and parcel of a protracted learning process. As Dr Eoin O’Malley and Prof John Coakley have asked on these pages this week, are our institutional failings the consequence of a bankrupt Irish political culture or are they the cause?
Was the focus of the conference misguided? Patterns of behaviour develop over time. Those guilty of impropriety become so accustomed to their wrongdoing that they begin to think of themselves as invincible. According to behaviour theory, collective guilt finds expression in the tolerance of further transgressions which are not corrected because of an absence of strong external pressure.
Whistleblowers are the exception. When ethical lapses occur, they are justified on the premise that such incidents are isolated and rare occurrences. The focus shifts towards the individual transgression at the expense of wider systemic analysis.
As a consequence, reform is reactionary and responds only to crisis. Maybe then it’s easier to blame institutions rather than ourselves, the voting public. We are an inherently contradictory people. We want wideranging Scandinavian public services but are only willing to contribute to a low tax base. A majority of us voted against the Lisbon Treaty but a minority voted for anti-Lisbon MEP candidates. We condemn corruption but condone the activity of local councillors who “deliver” for our area.
As Prof Michael Marsh (TCD) outlined yesterday, the electorate may feign demands for a policy-orientated party system but in reality make consistent choices for personality based representation.
Is it our own fault then? Are we assuming that institutions are self-reforming animals and that politics will voluntarily revolutionise itself? Is it something more fundamental and specific to our culture?
Prof Coakley spoke about the paradox of Irish political culture. Irish Independence signalled the overt rejection of British influence in Ireland, yet we accepted British models of government as our own.
Are our institutions more appropriate to the egalitarian organisation typical of Protestantism, which gave them birth, and less suited to the hierarchical disposition of Catholicism, which inhabits them?
Although geographically in the north of Europe, Ireland shares characteristics with the south. Ireland, Italy, Portugal and Spain have traditionally been distinguished by clannish catch-all parties and entrenched centre-periphery politics. Strong, larger-than-life, boss-like personalities act as indispensable intermediaries to access state resources.
Ireland also shares a Catholic ethos with the south. The Catholic Church places emphasis on the inherent weakness and shortcomings of human beings, their inability to escape sin and the consequent need for the church to be forgiving and protecting. The clergy, as mediators between mankind and God, facilitate, via confession, the possibility to be absolved of guilt.
Anger focused into outrage is necessary for a public opinion to grow into genuine demands for political change. Anger management if you will. But first we must join the dots of causes and consequences.
For this to happen, three crucial factors must coincide. An issue must strike deep into the hearts of an electorate, as the Ryan report, so powerfully demonstrated. Attitudes from diverse perspectives must crystallise and consequently invoke polarisation. Finally, an event must erupt whereby political parties are sharply differentiated in relation to public perception.
Institutional reform cannot make people act in ways that are more moral or more honest.

Reform of political system key to developing national policy

OPINION : A robust system of parliamentary oversight is vital to the restoration of public confidence
ASSERTIONS THAT the Houses of the Oireachtas are under performing are not new.
For many of its 90 years, Dáil Éireann has been derided as impotent, puny, weak and akin to a rubber stamp for government, while the most earnest discussions about Seanad Éireann relate to its abolition.
A large part of the explanation for this is laid at the door of the political system, which stands accused of failing to move beyond party or local interests towards non-partisan and detailed engagement in national policy. Others point to the greater role now played by the courts, media, the EU and (as the credit crunch has demonstrated) international organisations such as the IMF in the determination of government policy.
Monday’s conference in Trinity College, Dublin, on the subject of political reform heard how weaknesses in relation to one core function of the Oireachtas – holding government to account – have increasingly serious consequences as the responsibilities of government expand.
Might the need for tribunals of inquiry, failures in public spending controls and weak regulation of key sectors of the economy have been prevented if there was a more robust system of parliamentary oversight? And how can our national parliament fulfil its potential or the role constitutionally envisaged for it?
Popular remedies include electoral reform aimed at producing national legislators (rather than local ambassadors), and limiting the seemingly untrammelled power of the party whips.
While these proposals are not without merit, I would suggest that there are considerable benefits to be reaped by informed reflection about what parliament, or rather members of parliament, can do given the realities of the political environment in which they work.
The most important commodity in parliament is time, and using parliamentary time to best effect is central to the Houses improving their performance. Few members will disagree that many of the elaborate late-Victorian procedures which still govern parliamentary proceedings and debate are of questionable value.
Set-piece use of standing orders to raise matters of local concern or to raise spurious objections might elevate local profiles but do little to address issues of genuine national concern.
Why have a multi-stage legislative process in each House when many of these stages contribute nothing to the quality or content of legislation?
Most modern policy issues are complex and cannot be adequately considered in a question time format that does not allow proper engagement between members of government and opposition.
Notwithstanding better (and long overdue) funding and resourcing for the Oireachtas, growth in the State’s capacity and the fragmentation of the public service has not been matched by an equivalent expansion in the capacity of the parliament to comprehend, the extension of public authority beyond departments and core government offices and agencies.
Of course, the committee system has been of considerable benefit in bridging this gap and increasing the volume of work produced by the Oireachtas.
There is, however, substantial variety in the quality of work and attendance within the various committees, and most committee reports go unheeded. The work of government is increasingly cross-cutting, and greater fluidity is required within parliament to oversee policy developments.
Would not committees provide a more useful forum for ministers or ministers of state to answer parliamentary questions and to engage members on policy choices?
The Seanad has arguably the greatest potential for reform and is in my view an untapped resource.
In Britain the House of Lords has completely reinvented itself by acting as a filter for EU legislation, looking at the range of issues and identifying those in need of detailed examination by the Commons and its committees. It has also produced influential reports for government on key issues of public policy, for example on the accountability of regulators.
In a similar fashion, it may be time to move the Seanad beyond its principally legislative role to meet some of the needs of modern government.
It is no mere nod to classical ideas of representative democracy to assert that our parliament has a central role to play in modern Ireland, and that parliamentary accountability should be strengthened. Ultimate accountability must reside with public institutions, and policy choices made by governments can only be legitimised through exposure to parliamentary scrutiny.
Though exceptional in nature, the recent parliamentary debates over the Ryan report and the authority it provided for subsequent government action demonstrate what can be done when parliament is engaged.
A generation ago government chief whip Barry Desmond expressed his concern that without reform the Dáil would “ossify into a permanent state of preservation”.
For the Oireachtas to be relevant in the 21st Century, meaningful reform of parliamentary procedures and organisation must take place.
Moving beyond party politics, this will serve to narrow the gap between public expectation and parliamentary performance.

MUIRIS MacCARTHAIGH
Irish Times

The Islamic Foundation of Ireland

Statement in response to Joe Duffy’s Liveline show on the subject of Muslim schools
We would like to express our deep concern about the RTE Radio 1, being a respectable
national radio station giving free air time to two persons spreading false accusations
against two respectable Muslim institutions namely the Islamic Foundation of Ireland
and the Muslim National School in Clonskeagh, Dublin 14.
We were surprised that someone like Mr. Kamel Ghanem who has no qualification
whatsoever in evaluating scholastic standards can be allowed to give judgement on
standards of education in the Muslim National School in Clonskeagh in contradiction to
the views of professional school evaluators of the Department of Education. A whole
school evaluation was carried on the School two years ago and was very positive.
Mr. Ghanem also made very serious allegations about financial records insinuating
irregularities about the School finances. The School accounts are audited by chartered
accountants and made available to the Department of Education and Science and any
concerned person who has an interest in them.
Mr. Ghanem stated that secondary school teachers have expressed the views that the
standard of education of students coming from the Muslim National School in
Clonskeagh is low. It is inconceivable that secondary school teachers would openly
make such a prejudicial statement. Unfortunately such irresponsible allegations can
have their repercussions on our past, present and future Muslim students and our
teachers in the School.
The issue of the Mosque finances not being disclosed for public scrutiny was brought up
during the show by Mr. Liam (Mujahid) Egan. The Islamic Foundation of Ireland is a
registered 'Friendly Society' and is a recognised charity. The accounts of the Islamic
Foundation of Ireland for the year 2008 have already been submitted to the Registry of
Friendly Societies. They were posted on the notice board in the Mosque a week before
the Society's last annual general meeting, presented during the meeting and are always
made available for inspection by the members of the Society as required.
There is no doubt that the vicious attack by Mr. Ghanem on the Islamic Foundation of
Ireland and the Muslim schools is prompted by personal dispute with the School Patron
and the Chairman of the Board of Management. Mr. Ghanem’s conduct is a subject of
Garda investigation following an assault which happened in the offices of the Islamic
Foundation of Ireland on South Circular Road. As for Mr. Egan his continued
unwarranted attack on the Imam is well documented.
Many members of the Muslim community are aware of the grudges which both men
hold who have been consistently causing difficulties.
In the circumstances, Mr. Ghanem and Mr. Egan’s allegations are frivolous, untrue,
founded in ulterior motives, and should be totally disregarded as the words of
disgruntled and disaffected persons. Accordingly their complaints should be treated
with the contempt they deserve.
Islamic Foundation of Ireland
22/06/2009.



The Islamic Foundation of Ireland
Statement Re. North Dublin Muslim National School
The North Dublin Muslim National School was opened in 2001. The School was
initially intended to be established under a different patronage body other than the
Islamic Foundation of Ireland. The Islamic Foundation of Ireland offered support and
assistance to the School. In December 2007 when no alternative patronage body was
established, and the situation in the School management became untenable, the Islamic
Foundation of Ireland decided to take an active role.
In December 2007 a new Board of management was formed and since then the Board
has been working to improve the conditions which it had inherited from the previous
management.
Since the Whole School Evaluation Report was made by the inspectors of the
Department of Education and Science and a number of specific issues were brought to
the attention of the Board, discussions have been held between the School
representatives and officials of the Department of Education and Science. A number of
issues outlined in the report have been already addressed. These include:
 Child protection policy: Training has been provided to the staff on child
protection policy with the assistance of support services of the Department of
Education and Science. A policy has been developed and would be formally
ratified by the Board of Management at its next meeting.
 The Board of Management has made a decision to address the issue of time
allocated for curricular subjects to ensure that 5 hours and 10 minutes for
curricular subjects excluding religious education would be provided as required
by the regulations. The Board has also decided that qualified class teachers would
remain with their classes while religious instruction is being provided by religious
education teachers.
 The school has developed curricular plans for maths, music and Irish and these
have been approved by the Board of Management.
 The Board has made a decision that curricular plans for all other subjects would
be available by December 2009.
 On the issue of school accounts a summary accounts covering the period from
January 2008 to present day has been prepared and forwarded to the Department
of education and Science.
 The School Board has established that some of the unpaid bills to the Department
of Education and Science for light and heat had in fact applied to two schools, the
North Dublin Muslim School and another school on the same site. The Board
believe that it would be unfair of the Department to financially penalise the
current pupils in the school in respect of payments due in respect of previous
periods. The Board has discussed with the Department of Education the
repayment of money owed, and is willing to schedule payment.
 Certain measures have been taken to improve the current accommodation and at
the same time the Board is in discussion with the school parents over the
possibility of re-locating the School to another site.
 The School which has been under the patronage of the Islamic Foundation of
Ireland proper since its establishment in 1990 is the Muslim National School in
Clonskeagh. A recent evaluation report on the School was published. We refer
you to that report.
Islamic Foundation of Ireland
17/06/2009.