THE SECRETARY of a group of pro-Lisbon trade unionists has accused anti-treaty MEP Joe Higgins of “rewriting” parts of the document to support his agenda.
Blair Horan of the Civil Public and Services Union and the pro-treaty Charter Group, said Socialist Party MEP Mr Higgins had falsified the text of the treaty to suit his own arguments.
Mr Horan said comments made by Mr Higgins claiming that the treaty undermined workers’ rights were untrue. The Charter Group believes ratification of the Lisbon Treaty would bolster workers’ rights and that no one campaigning for a No vote had explained how rejecting the treaty could do so.
It also said the European Court of Justice (ECJ) had played a “progressive role” in social policy and that incorporating the Charter of Fundamental Rights into law, by ratifying the treaty, would benefit workers. Mr Horan accused Mr Higgins of falsifying extracts of the treaty on his website, particularly Article 52 which deals with the interpretation of workers’ rights.
“Joe Higgins has not just misrepresented the charter when he quotes Article 52, he has actually rewritten and falsified it to suit his own purposes,” he said.
“He has completely changed the meaning of Article 52 which simply says that a treaty article, which has a corresponding article in the Charter of Fundamental Rights, means the same thing. This does not mean that the charter is constrained by competition policy in the treaty.”
Mr Higgins said there had been a mistake in the text of Article 52 he had quoted, but that he was not attempting to falsify its meaning.
“Blair Horan has also quoted Article 52 incorrectly,” he said. “He has quoted from the 2000 version of the charter, not the December 2007 version. There were mistakes in the quotes used on both sides.”
Mr Higgins said the correct version of the text did not indicate workers would benefit from the treaty and that he felt the Charter Group was “clutching at straws”.
“They are supporting a treaty that will institutionalise the rulings of the ECJ which endorsed the exploitation of migrant posted workers brought in to do temporary contracts in different member states,” he said.
Mr Higgins said rulings by the ECJ had not supported workers’ rights because it had not wanted to interfere with the work of contractors and sub-contractors.
