Senate The European Politics Thread

Didn't the Constitutional Court reform packages (for Catalonia and Basque Country) in 2005 because it was unconstitutional? I'm guessing UDI results in direct rule from Madrid.

 

That's the fear, that the government activates Article 151 of the Constitution and directly takes over.

 

I heard it was being considered, but granted it was Twitter and I don't really want to trust far-left groups on the ground. Most of them are painting this as the return of Franco and lots of misinformation is flying around.

Reminds of Greece back in the early days of the debt crisis.

 

Former Irish PM Liam Cosgrave has died.

 

He was a god awful Taoiseach during one of the Republic's troubling periods.

 

Depends, really.

Puigdemont has said he will "carry out people's will" - but it sounds like the Catalan government wants to use this for future talks, more devolved powers for the regional administration. If they issue an UDI, you can kiss goodbye to Madrid giving them a pen, let alone more devolved powers.

 

Is Twitter a source of misinformation, a basic bane to proper reporting, over there as it is here? I hope not, but I can see why that website makes people's temperatures rise.

For my part, I admired the laws that Spain's government passed after 2004 for gender minorities. Bernie helped me to appreciate the northern social democracies, since I knew less about them than the western countries of Europe.

How are things with the Hague? I've always been confused why there are two human rights courts (one at the UN and the other in Europe). Someone explained this during a class once. It would be nice if we had human rights courts all around the world, since human rights should be considered more valuable in general.

 

The European Court of Human Rights has the power to overrule European governments.

It is more or less designed to stop another Hitler, if one ever came to power in Europe.

 

The problem obviously being that people like Hitler tend to ignore these kind of courts
Those who accept these court rulings tend to be mostly in accordance with democratic principles anyway. So while it is pretty good to have such an entity, it wouldn't really be able to do much about any new dictator, unless other countries add the necessary force to back it up.

 

Spain's Constitutional Court has suspended Catalan Parliament session, which was planned for next Monday.

I'm assuming this is to stop a UDI

 

https://www.economist.com/news/lead...hey-really-want-it-not-too-late-stop-break-up

Separatism in CataloniaIt is not too late to stop the break-up of Spain
To avoid calamity, ask Catalans what they really want

print-edition icon Print edition | Leaders
Oct 7th 2017
WHEN a democracy sends riot police to beat old ladies over the head with batons and stop them voting, something has gone badly wrong. Catalans say that almost 900 people were hurt by police in the referendum for independence on October 1st. Whatever the provocation from Catalan leaders in staging an unconstitutional poll, the reaction of Mariano Rajoy, the prime minister, has thrown Spain into its worst constitutional crisis since an attempted coup in 1981.
If Mr Rajoy thought that cracking heads would put a stop to secessionism, he could not have been more wrong. He has only created a stand-off that has energised his enemies and shocked his friends (see article). On October 3rd Catalonia, one of Spain’s richest regions, was paralysed by a protest strike. Hundreds of thousands of demonstrators have marched to express their outrage.
Secession would be a disaster for Spain. The country would lose its second city and risk the further loss of the Basque region. Secession would also hurt Catalans, which is why a majority of them probably oppose it. And Catalan independence might stir up separatism elsewhere in Europe—in Scotland again, no doubt, but also in northern Italy, in Corsica, perhaps even in Bavaria. To prevent the crisis deepening, both sides need to seek a new constitutional settlement. Instead, they are digging in and Catalonia is on the brink of unilaterally—and illegally—declaring independence.
After Franco
Spain has a historical fear of dismemberment. Catalan secessionism was one of the factors that brought about the Spanish civil war of the 1930s. Many Spaniards no doubt share the anger of King Felipe who, in a rare televised speech, denounced Catalonia’s leaders for irresponsibly and disloyally tearing up the constitution of 1978. After all, Catalans overwhelmingly endorsed that settlement, which entrenched democracy, brought prosperity and granted a large dose of autonomy to Spanish regions, including Catalonia.
A well-run democracy must abide by the rule of law. That is what protects democratic liberties, not least the freedom of minorities to express discontent. Until referendum day, nobody who experienced the vibrancy of Barcelona could seriously claim that Catalonia was oppressed. With few exceptions, notably when empires collapse, the world generally favours national unity over self-determination by subnational groups. Many of the states liberated by the break-up of the Soviet empire joined the European Union, but these days the EU is wary, warning would-be secessionists that new states have no automatic right to join. Without Spain’s support, Catalonia would find itself on the wrong side of a new customs wall.
For all these reasons the Catalan leader, Carles Puigdemont, does not have a strong case for independence. Nor can he claim a real mandate. He rammed the laws authorising the referendum through the Catalan parliament with a narrow majority and without proper debate. Those laws have no formal legal standing. Before his referendum, opinion polls suggested that only 40-45% of Catalans wanted to break away. The 90% vote to leave was 90% of an unregistered turnout of well under half, because Catalonia’s Remainers mostly declined to take part. As with populists elsewhere, Mr Puigdemont has offered a simplistic vision, without explaining the costs of independence or how it might come about.
But that is not the end of the story. Democracy rests on the consent of the governed. Even some who disagree with Mr Puigdemont’s methods believe Catalonia has a case for nationhood. It could survive economically. A lot of its people think it constitutes a nation. Under autonomy, Catalan leaders have promoted their language and their nationalist creed.
The pain in Spain
Whatever the legality of separatism, once the desire for independence reaches a critical point, governments must deal with it in three ways: crush it, bow to it, or negotiate in good faith, knowing that separation may still be the outcome.
Mr Rajoy has failed to grasp the nature of this choice. First he blocked the nationalists in the courts and, last weekend, he resorted to force. His deployment of policemen to suppress the Catalan vote was not only a propaganda gift to them but, more important, crossed a line. Aggression against crowds of peaceful citizens may work in Tibet but cannot be sustained in a Western democracy. In the contest between formal justice and natural justice, natural justice wins eventually every time. Constitutions exist to serve citizens, not the other way around. Rather than uphold the rule of law as he intended, Mr Rajoy ended up tarnishing the legitimacy of the Spanish state.
Will Mr Puigdemont declare independence? That would be reckless and irresponsible but, if he does, Mr Rajoy should resist the temptation to arrest Catalan leaders and, for the time being, avoid using his power to suspend regional rule. Just now, either measure would only compound his mistakes.
Only a negotiation can restore calm and it should start immediately. Even now most Catalans can probably still be won over with the offer of greater autonomy, including the power to raise and keep more of their own taxes, more protection for the Catalan language and some kind of recognition of the Catalans as a “nation”. Mr Rajoy might even take up the opposition Socialists’ idea of turning Spain into a federal state.
Any settlement, though, must include the option of a referendum on independence. Separation would be a wrenching change for Catalonia and the rest of Spain, so should not be done lightly. A majority of Catalans eligible to vote should be the minimum threshold for independence. A follow-up vote on the terms of a separation might be wise, too.
For all his deficiencies, David Cameron, the former British prime minister, was right about allowing a referendum on Scottish independence in 2014. He made the case for Scotland to stay, and won the vote convincingly. Mr Rajoy should do the same. The case for the unity of Spain is strong. But it must be won by force of argument. By using force alone, Mr Rajoy is not preventing the break-up of Spain, but hastening it.
This article appeared in the Leaders section of the print edition under the headline "How to save Spain"


* * * *
Note, I haven't run this past our resident expert Ghost to verify if it's correct. JoinTheSchwarz, it seems to me like a fairly mild retelling of the story with a dreadful pun on "the rain in Spain" and also a great slight against populism, "As with populists elsewhere, Mr Puigdemont has offered a simplistic vision, without explaining the costs of independence or how it might come about."'
But again, we need our expert - and certainly not an actual Spaniard with a grasp of political history and nuance - to confirm.

 

Well, I hope you're happy with yourself! You've scared me from liking this post!

 

BBC News

A bit of business fallout due to the Catalan situation - 'On Thursday, Sabadell, a major bank, decided to transfer its legally registered base from Barcelona to the south-eastern Spanish city of Alicante. Its HQ and workforce will remain in Barcelona. CaixaBank, another large Barcelona-based institution, is reported to be considering a similar move. This would ensure the banks remained within the eurozone and under the supervision of the European Central Bank, even if Catalonia broke away from Spain.'

 

It's not a bad piece, Ender. It fails to mention that the threat of Catalonian self-determination has been successfully used several times in the past to achieve greater autonomy, especially fiscal autonomy, although never this spectacularly: it's very possible that this ends up being a similar gambit.

I agree that a federal state should be on the table, and personally it's my favored outcome, but a strong feeling of centralism is one of Franco's legacies and I'm not sure how the Spanish people would take it.

 

This sentence in the middle of the piece:

Whatever the legality of separatism, once the desire for independence reaches a critical point, governments must deal with it in three ways: crush it, bow to it, or negotiate in good faith, knowing that separation may still be the outcome.

is basically what the whole article as well as the real situation at hand boils down to.

 

When it comes to separation and any potential success for a European break away state, there is one elephant in the room:

The European Union.

As the Scots found out, membership is not automatic and the EU (including significant member states like France and Germany) are highly likely to block any talks towards a separatist state. Plus, the criteria for membership is so strict, Catalonia and others have zero chance in meeting it. People will not vote for independence, if it involves economic chaos and austerity.

But, it is unwise for The Economist to compare Catalonia to Scotland; the Scots, regardless of what they think, didn't have a brutal dictator ruling over them in London and repressing them since 1939. England was not Franco. Madrid's response to the referendum hasn't helped and no doubt brought up old memories. Scotland and Catalonia are completely different cases and shouldn't be compared.

The "pact of silence" in hindsight might have brought stability in the 80s/90s, but is becoming counterproductive now. I know the socialist government in the 2000s more or less broke the "silence" and began removing Franco's statues and addressing his crimes; maybe a full reconciliation with the past is needed once and for all. But, that's for the Spanish people to decide. Not me.

 

Both the country's largest power company and two major banks have announced they are moving the companies out of Catalonia. The government has announced that they are expediting their relocation.

This might be it. The previous Catalonian president has already declared that they are not ready for independence. The capital hath spoken.

 

The economic card always triumphs the UDI

 

Today is a historical day, the Dutch coalition partners (VVD, CDA, D66 and CU) have finally presented their coaltion agreement to the public and Puigdemont declared Catalan independence only to suspend it so that there can be talks.

 

So in Holland:

Income

• The new coalition will shake up the income tax system by cutting the number of tax bands from four to two from 2019
• The change will cut the tax bill of someone earning €40,000 by €1,200 a year, but middle and high earners will benefit most. In total, the tax cuts will cost €5bn
• The new system will involve an income tax rate of 37% on earnings up to €68,000 and 49.5% for all income above that. Currently taxpayers are charged roughly 36.55% on earnings up to €20,000, 40.8% on earnings up to €67,000 and 52% above that

Americans, look! SOSHULISM!

Work and benefits

• The contract system (BBA) for freelancers will be replaced
• Freelancers will have to earn at least €15-€18 an hour to be classed as self-employed
• Paid paternity leave to be extended from two to five days in 2019 and new fathers will also be allowed to take a further five weeks off at 70% of their regular pay from 2020
• Child benefits will go up by a total of €1bn
• The pension system will be overhauled

Moar soshulism
In other news tho Holland is great.

 

Be still my beating heart.

http://www.france24.com/en/20171011-macron-takes-french-eurosceptics-eu-flag-europe-melenchon

 

That would make you dead. Or a vampire . Interesting article.

 

Macron is the second most beautiful man in Europe and the saviour of France.

mon president

 

Big election today in Austria all polls indicate that ÖVP ("centre"-right) will win under the leadership of Sebastian Kurz aka the boy wonder or wonder boy. (he's only 31 years old) Do note I put the centre under quotations mark because Kurz has moved the party hard to the right to attract the FPÖ voters.
Second place will be tightly contested between FPÖ (far right) and SPÖ (centre-left) there is also a chance that the Austrian National Council will only have 3 parties due to the smaller parties NEOS (centrist liberals), Pilfz (populistic far left) and GRÜNE (greens) not reaching the 4% voting threshold.

There is uncertainty what the new ruling coalition will look like. The ÖVP-FPÖ coalition seems to be the most obvious choice. The leader of the SPÖ (Kern) doesn't want to be a junior partner this rules out ÖVP lead grand coalition. SPÖ is internally split whether or not they should go for the SPÖ-FPÖ coalition.

Anyway this is all the basics I could gather, I think @yankee8255 can fill in all the juicy details I've not mentioned. Such as an Austrian comedian unloading a lorry full of manure infront of the Austrian parliament building.

First exit polls will be released when the voting ends at 17:00 CEST.

And you can still screw the poor by increasing VAT on all basic consumption from 6% to 9%. Seriously what more do you want Americans?