Talk:Treaty of Lisbon: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 06:04, 12 January 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Treaty of Lisbon article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5: 50 days

European Union High‑importance

	European Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the European Union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European UnionWikipedia:WikiProject European UnionTemplate:WikiProject European UnionEuropean Union articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

A news item involving Treaty of Lisbon was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 3 November 2009.

Wikipedia

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on December 1, 2012.

Removed clarify tag

I've removed the clarify tag from the part about the democratic deficit. If someone needs more clarification, he/she can look into the reference at the end of the sentence and will find in the first section with the word "deficit":

The further development of the competences of the European Parliament can reduce, but not completely fill, the gap between the extent of the decision-making power of the Union’s institutions and the citizens’ democratic power of action in the Member States. Neither as regards its composition nor its position in the European competence structure is the European Parliament sufficiently prepared to take representative and assignable majority decisions as uniform decisions on political direction. Measured against requirements placed on democracy in states, its election does not take due account of equality, and it is not competent to take authoritative decisions on political direction in the context of the supranational balancing of interests between the states. It therefore cannot support a parliamentary government and organise itself with regard to party politics in the system of government and opposition in such a way that a decision on political direction taken by the European electorate could have a politically decisive effect. Due to this structural democratic deficit, which cannot be resolved in an association of sovereign national states (Staatenverbund), further steps of integration that go beyond the status quo may undermine neither the States’ political power of action nor the principle of conferral.

Opt-out (new section)

Actually the anon is right there was never an opt-out from the Charter of Fundamental Right. There was and is a clarifying protocol. It's explained in more details here: Charter of Fundamental Rights#The British and Polish protocol.

The other opt-out does not actually relate to QMV but rather the the legal nature of acts adopted under the former third pillar and the jurisdiction of the European Commission and European Court of Justice to enforce them. The option of the UK and Ireland to opt-in or out of individual acts remains as before. The UK has a special opt-out to withdraw completely to all third-pillar acts. It's explained here: Framework decision#United Kingdom opt-out. — Blue-Haired Lawyer ^t 17:07, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Abuse/Vandalism

This page appears to have been vandalized under the topic of "EU evolution timeline". I could not find a place to edit it out.Markrarcher42 (talk) 13:02, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is it true that the Treaty is basically the same as the European Constitution?

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/valeacutery-giscard-destaing-the-eu-treaty-is-the-same-as-the-constitution-398286.html

But lift the lid and look in the toolbox: all the same innovative and effective tools are there, just as they were carefully crafted by the European Convention: a stable Presidency; a streamlined Commission; a Parliament with genuine legislative rights; a Foreign Minister, even if he has been given another inadequate title; decisions taken by a double majority of governments and citizens; and the most advanced charter of fundamental rights in the world. Are there any substantive differences, or are they pretty much cosmetic, aside from the fact that the U.K. now gets to opt out of a lot of stuff? Зенитная Самоходная Установка (talk) 23:00, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Lesbian treaty" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Lesbian treaty. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 14#Lesbian treaty until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Vahurzpu (talk) 02:13, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Treaty of Lisbon 2007 3104x2072 UPSCALED.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:30, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]