Libertas a pan European Project : Read OP Intro Carefully - Mod

I don't go there much anymore,

Re playing the man and not the ball there are still no policies and no manifesto all we have to go on is a group of men and the odd woman in Ganley's cliche
It is natural and indeed the BCC stated in its primetime judgement that we are allowed ask questions about Ganley to do that background data must be scrutinised. In doing so we are engaging in a common practice
in democratic societies to scrutinise and question
political people. Indeed it is our democratic duty

Quote :

The Commission would acknowledge that the majority of viewers would have
been aware of the context given the events of the past year in the political
arena in Ireland. Mr. Ganley has risen to the fore-front of
Irish politics. The funding of Libertas
has been, and continues to be, widely debated and discussed in political, media
and public forums. In entering such a
political arena, Mr. Ganley could expect his business past and political
aspirations to be held up to scrutiny.
It is common practice in democratic societies to scrutinise and question
political people in such a manner.

BCC

hear hear that fellow

I obviously agree. It would be very unhealthy if any person or group putting themselves up for election were not open to scrutiny.

In the last thread I read on Ganley and Libertas on Politics.ie most members posting voiced general disgust on the report from Sweden about trying to buy up the June List party. Forums all across Europe are posting scrutiny and questions about Libertas. People use forums and blogs to put forward their views -Libertas does it and so do Libertas's opponents.

The Charter is there to protect members and third parties and the site itself. Freedom of speech is a principle but it is reasonable and necessary that any allegations are backed up with information. The value of this thread imo is that so much information and back up is provided and that an unfolding picture is here of where Libertas is going politically.

The Irish Times reported on Libertas's German launch. I would be interested to know if the consultant, project manager and lawyer/actor and who fronted the launch with Ganley are paid employees. Also, there was a five page policy document: any link to that would be appreciated.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2009/0303/1224242151629.html

Quote :

In a five-and-a-half-page document, Libertas Deutschland introduced itself as a party of “traditional values and European goals like freedom, truthfulness, tolerance, common sense, family and human dignity”.

Robin Matthews speaking on "reaffirming peoples' faith in Europe (short video)
http://www.libertas.eu/news

Euractive reports today that in France Libertas will unveil a trio of politicians to spearhead its campaign: Viscount Philippe de Villiers, Frédéric Nihous and Jérôme Rivière. This is pretty well as predicted by FA on this thread.

Quote :

De Villiers is a well-known face in French politics, having contested two presidential elections on the far-right, eurosceptic platform of his Mouvement pour la France (MPF) party. He has also generated controversy due to his public pronunciations on Islam and Muslim immigration.

Nihous hails from the CPNT (Hunting, Fishing, Nature and Tradition) party, an agrarian movement that aims to defend the traditional values of rural France, notably hunting. The party won six seats in the 1999 European elections but lost them all in 2004, when it did not surpass the 3% voter threshold that allows a party to be reimbursed for campaign expenses.

EurActiv has also learned that Rivière, a former UMP (Union pour un mouvement populaire) politician who supported Philippe de Villiers' 2007 presidential campaign, will be unveiled as a candidate. Rivière was a member of French President Nicolas Sarkozy's UMP party until his expulsion in mid-2007. It had previously been thought that Rivière would serve as Libertas France's campaign director without putting his name forward for the June ballot, according to French media reports.

European elections experts at pro-EU integration think tank Notre Europe described the Libertas France conglomeration as an "eclectic mix", expressing their surprise that de Villiers has allied himself to Declan Ganley's movement.

"We find it very surprising that Philippe de Villiers, who is a staunch sovereignist, should join Libertas, who describe themselves as anything but sovereignist. In fact, they call themselves Europeanist," they said, adding that "there is a definite contradiction there – these are very different animals".

This trio is a further indication, the source claimed, of Libertas's method of "fishing for candidates" around Europe to create a "maverick umbrella" of party faces.

For anyone waiting for Libertas's programme, they will have to wait longer.

Quote :

Meanwhile, the launch of Libertas's electoral manifesto, which party founder Declan Ganley told EurActiv "will lay out our policies in a very wide range of areas," has been postponed from 25 March to an as-yet-unnamed later date. This event was due to take place in Rome.

Is there any possibility of writing a Programme that does not offend at least a half of the mixed bag of personnages (many of them in the pay of Libertas) who have been assembled so far in the Pan European Party?
http://www.euractiv.com/en/eu-elections/libertas-unveils-eclectic-french-candidates-eu-elections/article-180122

Riviere's blog here - he seems to be anti-Nato, as well as anti-Lisbon (as well as anti-homsexual, anti-moslem). How will that sit with Ganley?

http://jerome-riviere.blogspot.com/

Jerome Rivere was an Mp in my favorate part of France Alpes-Maritime.
The rest was predicted here.

I await the French press on this with interest. They will eat them up.

Someone will have to compare all the Libertas programs to see what they use in each territory.

Is this the Libertas flag? see here

tory Ina dale has a view on Ganley

Quote :

Libertas to Stand in Euro Elections in the UK



Iain Dale 11:52 AM

Excuse me if I can't get terribly excited about the announcement this morning by Libertas that
they will field candidates in Britain in the European elections. It's
not clear to me what they are really offering, beyond opposition to the
Lisbon Treaty. Well, the Conservatives and UKIP already offer that, so
what exactly is the point of Libertas, beyond being an outlet for
Declan Ganley's increasingly large ego? Ganley did a brilliant job with
the Irish referendum, and I can't help thinking that his efforts would
be better directed in campaigning for a No vote in the second Irish
referendum. But the whole experience seems to have gone to his head.

I think Libertas will find it difficult to make headway here without a
charismatic figurehead. Ganley has appointed ex soldier Robin Matthews
as UK leader of Libertas. He had to appoint him, since they clearly
don't have enough members to hold one of those quaint old things called
a leadership election.

Libertas's only hope is to somehow capture the public imagination like they managed to in Ireland. I can't
see how that is possible when they are spreading themselves to thinly
over 27 countries, and when they don't seem to have anyone at the top
capable of capturing the media's attention - apart from Ganley himself.

here

Richard Corbett and others comment on Libertas Here

The MPF have split in two over Libertas being too close to Nato and Ganley going back on some promise over indepndent voter list.
France's MPF split over Libertas being too close to NATO and Ganley changing his position

Frightened Albanian wrote:

The MPF have split in two over Libertas being too close to Nato and Ganley going back on some promise over indepndent voter list.
France's MPF split over Libertas being too close to NATO and Ganley changing his position

cactus flower said

Quote :

Riviere's blog here - he seems to be anti-Nato, as well as anti-Lisbon (as well as anti-homsexual, anti-moslem). How will that sit with Ganley?

Quote :

M. Ganley est atlantiste, libre-échangiste, favorable à l'euro, à l'entrée de la Turquie dans l'UE.

Any idea where Ganley said he was favourable to Turkish membership of the EU? This cuts across the main plank of his No friends in France.
This is car crash politics.

Car Crash or just cash. Either way as this express gets media in the broader sphere all excited as it is invovling locals they will take out the spades . Deco will be laid bare before too long.

UK media are interested in Anglo Adriatic Investment Fund in Albania I believe.

Thursday, March 12, 2009Right-wing parties rally under Libertas banner

LARA MARLOWE in Paris

JOY IS not an emotion one usually associates with Viscount Philippe de
Villiers, the right-wing French politician who has built his career on
fear-mongering over the influx of Muslim immigrants and opposition to
what he calls the “oligarchs and commissars” of Brussels. But
“joy” was the word Mr de Villiers used to describe the launching of a
joint European parliamentary election campaign uniting his Movement for
France (MPF) and Frédéric Nihous’s Hunting, Fishing, Nature and
Tradition (CPNT) party under the Libertas.eu banner yesterday. Libertas founder
Declan Ganley, whom Mr de Villiers called “our hero”, proudly watched over the ceremony.
Mr de Villiers delivered a romantic version of Mr Ganley’s alleged
heroism. “They fobbed a repeat of the constitution on us, and one man
rose up, an Irish businessman who won the support of the people.” Mr
de Villiers’s tone veered into sarcasm, his speciality. The good people
of Ireland were in for a surprise, he said. “When people vote No, they
must be forced to vote again.” Hence the importance of June’s
European elections. Since 26 EU countries were deprived of a vote on
Lisbon, “this European election must replace the referendum people
didn’t have”. Mr de Villiers mingled grievances against Europe
and President Nicolas Sarkozy. Europe “must draw its borders, once and
for all, without Turkey”, he said. He complained that Mr Sarkozy has
allowed negotiations on Turkish accession to proceed on 10 of 35
chapters. And Mr Sarkozy did away with a constitutional provision
requiring a French referendum on Turkish accession. Then it was
time for a tirade against “the crazy madmen who continue stealing
people’s identity and traditions”. Europe was preparing regulations
that would make rosé wine by mixing red and white, Mr de Villiers
claimed. And Europe wanted to impose health warnings on camembert
cheese! Standing beside Mr Ganley, champion of free markets, Mr de
Villiers the protectionist pleaded for “European preference, so that
Europe can fight outsourcing and the transfer of our means of
production to China”. Still standing beside Mr Ganley, the
defence contractor who has just named four former senior defence
officials from the US and Britain to the board of his company, Mr de
Villiers condemned Mr Sarkozy’s announcement yesterday that he is
bringing France back into the integrated military command of Nato. “The
return to Nato is the end of the independence of France. It is the end
of the very idea of European defence.” Mr Ganley took the floor,
calling France “the beating heart of Europe”. But where Mr de Villiers
voiced grievances, Mr Ganley incited them. If the Lisbon Treaty is ratified,
he said, there will never be another referendum. “The
small little bit of power you have will be taken away from you!” Mr
Ganley harangued the small crowd of journalists as if they were
supporters at a rally. “These elites in Brussels have silenced the
French people. They ignored you completely! They point at the people of
France and the Netherlands and Ireland and they say, ‘There is
something wrong with you. You are ignorant. You are not European.’” It was time for
people to “tell the elites in Brussels, ‘No. There is something wrong with you.’” Paul-Marie
Coûteaux, one of three MEPs elected on Mr de Villiers’s list five years
ago, created a storm by denouncing the party’s alliance with Mr Ganley
on the eve of the launch. Mr Coûteaux accused Mr Ganley of
supporting the election of a president of Europe by universal suffrage,
Turkish accession to the EU and Nato membership for all European states. Mr Ganley
confounded several sources who had the strong impression that he supported Turkey’s EU
application and Nato. “I completely agree on Turkey,” he said. “On the matter of Nato, this is a
decision that must be made at member-state level. Ireland is neutral.” (In
an article he published in the US in 2003, Mr Ganley attacked the
constitutional treaty on the grounds it would damage the traditional
defence relationship between Europe and the US.) So how much was
Libertas contributing to Mr de Villiers’s and Mr Nihous’s European
campaigns? “Not one centime!” he protested, denouncing “unhealthy,
malignant rumours” and “calumny”. “Not a sou!” added Mr Nihous. When I
asked Mr Ganley whether Libertas had offered Swedish party Junilistan
€900,000 to campaign under his party’s name, he answered with a sharp
“No” and walked away.

Did John McGuirk not say on Newstalk that money was discussed with the swedes and there in the Times today is ganley saying they did not. That is another contradiction of a Libertas spokesperson.

tp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/politics_show/7918376.stm
JON SOPEL: So let me just be clear. You are announcing that you will be fielding candidates here in the UK.

DECLAN GANLEY: Well we're planning to make some announcement on Tuesday, we are looking at that, we've been talking to lots of people and we'll be announcing further plans on Tuesday.

JON SOPEL: Hang on. Just because of what you've just said, the logical conclusion can only be, that you are fielding candidates.

DECLAN GANLEY: We are hoping to do that, absolutely.

JON SOPEL: You're hoping to field candidates here in the UK.

DECLAN GANLEY: It's very important that the British people get an opportunity to send a clear and unequivocal message that's not anti European, but that calls on Brussels to be accountable. The fact is, is that more than 75% of British law now comes from Brussels.

The people that initiate that law are completely unaccountable, they are unknown to the British people. Brussels is where these decisions are being made. The European constitution, subjugates the laws of Britain to European law, which it says in the Treaty, have precedence over British law.

JON SOPEL: Just want to be clear. Will you scatter gun which constituencies you choose or if you're a pan-European party, presumably you'll fight in every constituency.

DECLAN GANLEY: Well that would be, ideally, that would be the objective but it remains to be seen whether or not we can do that. The key thing is selecting candidates of a caliber that are deserving of people's trust and that can send a clear message. And this is not something that's against any party in the UK, people - whether they be Labour supporters … (interjection)

JON SOPEL: You see the Conservatives would turn round to you and say, Look, we've been absolutely consistent. We've demanded a referendum. We've opposed the Lisbon Treaty. We opposed the EU Constitution. Why are you querying our pitch.

DECLAN GANLEY: We're not querying anybody's pitch. The fact is, is that if - let's take the Conservative Party, you raised them as an example. If they won every single one of the seventy two European seats in the European Parliamaent, from the UK, they would have seventy two seats out of over seven hundred and fifty.

The fact is, is that you have to bring together members from all over Europe, from Germany, from France, from Ireland, from Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia etc, because you have to have big numbers in the European Parliament to ensure that this anti-democratic system of governance that's in Brussels at the moment, is fixed - it needs to be fixed immediately and we must make absolutely sure that Gordon Brown's ratification of this Treaty, which is, is appalling, has appalling consequences for Britain and for all of Europe, particularly at these hard and straightened economic times, that that thing stays dead.

JON SOPEL: And a lot of people think that it's not exactly healthy for democracy, to have a multi millionaire, parachuting and decide right, okay, I'm going to make this my pet concern. I'm going to try and force myself on this electorate. Look what happened to Jimmy Goldsmith.

Just caught up with this BBC interview from last Sunday -
no confirmation whether there will be any UK candidates. The only answer as to why Libertas would stand against the Tories when the policies on the EU are identical is the "need a pan-European party" one.

All this stuff about the "anti-democratic system" in Brussels is just tiresome nonsense if - like Libertas - you can't actually formulate and articulate a system that would make it more democratic (Much less convince enough people so that your system is the one that is actually adopted).

The European Convention had multiple proposals for how the Commission President should be elected. For instance, the "undemocratic" Commission proposed that the President of the Commission would be elected by:
a) a 2/3 majority of the European Parliament, and,
b) a simple majority of the European Council.

Others, needless to say had alternative ideas - that didn't result in agreement on a "best method" to adopt. And that was just in the Convention - in other words, BEFORE the lawyers of the member states started nit-picking and redrafting their way through the text that the Convention proposed.

Libertas's critique is becoming increasingly vague and the emphasis on being pro-Europe much stronger, in spite of the fraternising and involvemetn with eurosceptic groups: the strains of having to try to bring very disparate right wing parties and individuals across Europe are I suspect making it impossible to agree on anything specific. I mentioned in an earlier post that the launch of the long promised programme has been postponed.

Sipo have reported , Libertas and Ganley failed to anwser their questions. transparency anyone
Here

A very damning report. Machine Nation is in the process of moving sites to Machinenation.org (to provide a better environment for members). I'll come back to this as soon as possible.

Yes they are completely out of line there. there is no recommendation to prosecute though. Is that up to Gaormely as minister?

The report states :
"4. Sanctions for non-cooperation with the Standards Commission
The sanctions provided for under the legislation should be reviewed. In particular,
failure to cooperate with enquiries made by the Standards Commission under section

4(4) of the Act should constitute an offence."

So, one presumes it does not at present.

And in the summary of the report recommending improvements they say the following:

3. Transparency in the funding of campaigns
During the 2008 referendum, concerns were expressed about the lack of transparency
in the financing of the referendum campaign by Libertas. There were calls for
Libertas to provide details of how it had funded its campaign. The Standards
Commission considers that it might be unreasonable to expect third parties to show
how an election or referendum campaign has been funded, if political parties and
candidates at elections are not subject to the same scrutiny. While political parties
and candidates must disclose details of donations above the relevant statutory
disclosure thresholds, other details as to how campaigns were funded (e.g., own
resources, loans, donations received which were below the disclosure threshold etc.)
are not provided."

So not so clear cut really.

candide wrote:

The report states :
"4. Sanctions for non-cooperation with the Standards Commission
The sanctions provided for under the legislation should be reviewed. In particular,
failure to cooperate with enquiries made by the Standards Commission under section

4(4) of the Act should constitute an offence."

So, one presumes it does not at present.

And in the summary of the report recommending improvements they say the following:

3. Transparency in the funding of campaigns
During the 2008 referendum, concerns were expressed about the lack of transparency
in the financing of the referendum campaign by Libertas. There were calls for
Libertas to provide details of how it had funded its campaign. The Standards
Commission considers that it might be unreasonable to expect third parties to show
how an election or referendum campaign has been funded, if political parties and
candidates at elections are not subject to the same scrutiny. While political parties
and candidates must disclose details of donations above the relevant statutory
disclosure thresholds, other details as to how campaigns were funded (e.g., own
resources, loans, donations received which were below the disclosure threshold etc.)
are not provided."

So not so clear cut really.

I look forward to reading this properly later.