Today, however, there was devastating news. Staff in the hospital received a memo stating that 12 of 31 beds in the acute Laurel ward are closed with immediate effect and a surgical day ward with 24 beds will shortly be closed for two weeks and will return with only 8 of the 24 beds. This means that 30 to 40 day procedures will now be reduced to ten or 13. This is devastating news for the staff, the patients and especially for those suffering on waiting lists, and it arises from the most draconian cuts. In 2009 the hospital had a budget of €104 million; this year that budget is €84 million, a devastating 20% cut. The HSE acknowledges this is one of the best and most efficient hospitals in the country. In what is termed “activity” it has returned 4% over target and is supremely successful, but now it is being hammered into the ground with enormous consequences for the sick and suffering who languish for longer periods on waiting lists.

We are told that NewEra will advise on, and oversee, a restructuring of the semi states and will work with the Minister for public Service and Reform on the sale of assets.

In reality NewEra is being set up to privatise these public enterprises. That is crystal clear from the Fine Gael document dating back to early 2010 which declares baldly, ‘We will look to sell ESB International, Bord Gais and ESB PowerGen & Supply when market and other conditions are appropriate.’

This large scale push for privatisation is being propelled relentlessly by the EU/IMF/ECB. Invited into Ireland last November by the Fianna Fail/Green government, the so called Troika was supposed to come to the assistance of the Irish people in their hour of need. Their main agenda, however, has been to salvage European bankers and speculators from their disastrous gambling in the Irish property bubble when they lent tens of billions to Irish developers and banks in the hope of a quick profit.

Having got the previous and current governments to capitulate utterly to their demands that the Irish people should be made to pay the massive bad debts for which they had no responsibility whatever. Now the Troika wants a further instalment of its insatiable neoliberal agenda which is to force maximum privatisation of state assets.

The IMF has a long and inglorious record in using its clout to exert pressure in the interests of major transnational corporations. In the 1980s and early 1990s, it was involved in what were known as Structural Adjustment Programmes in many African and Latin American countries which had debt difficulties. Pretending to be involved in the interests of the poorest populations on the globe, in reality the IMF acted like shock troops for Western capitalism.

It insisted on wholesale cuts to social and educational programmes which benefitted the poorest and dictated that public services and enterprises be handed over to multinational corporations. This policy left a trail of social and economic destruction in its wake.

It would be bad enough to try and force the sale of our State enterprises but worse the Troika is insisting that a substantial part of the proceeds goes into the black hole of banking debt. In other words it is almost literally like the selling off of the family solver to pay the family creditors except in this case the debts did not originate with the family members.

Semi state companies could play a key role in rescuing the Irish economy from the dire consequences of the policies of austerity being imposed on our people in order to channel their resources to rescuing the big financial gamblers . The savage assault on incomes and living standards has meant a drastic shrinking in the domestic economy and this is what is causing the live register of unemployed and seriously underemployed people to veer toward half a million. These companies now employ over 40,000 workers. However they could be developed in a way that would increase those numbers massively.

The government wants to sell off substantial parts of the ESB. Instead this company should be used to channel major investment infrastructural projects around the country. This could be in the area of alternative energy generation or related activities that could see workers of many different skills taken off the dole.

Among the sectors of infrastructure that the government would like to target for privatisation is our water production and supply service. Already it has been decided to remove responsibility for water from the local authorities and put it in the hands of one national company to be called Irish Water. The government has also announced the imposition of a water tax within the next few years. This is blatant preparation for the handing of our water distribution systems over to big business operators.

The result of these privatisations if carried through would not be radically improved services for the majority of the people. What we would have are severe rises in prices as the privateers sought a profit on their investments on the backs of ordinary people.

The trade union Unite has expressed its total opposition to the government’s privatisation programme. It has also stated its intention to fight any forced privatisation in the ESB with industrial action. Workers throughout the economy and indeed the personal customers of the ESB should join in this resistance and leave the government in no doubt but that a substantial numbers of citizens will fight to maintain public ownership but also to turn the publicly owned companies into democratically run engines of recovery for jobs and communities.

The Department of Finance Press brief’s opening sentence seemed innocuous enough, stating that the group would “provide advice on the proper stewardship of state assets and on opportunities for the better use of those assets.”

The real intent, however, could not be disguised when the very first Term of Reference reads: “To consider the potential for asset disposals in the public sector, including commercial state bodies, in view of the indebtedness of the State.” And in case that wasn’t clear enough Term Number Two goes: “To draw up a list of possible asset disposals.”

To make sure that these Terms of Reference mean exactly what they say, Minister Lenihan put his very own wolf in wolves’ clothing in charge of their implementation. Following his previous recommendations – through the report of the so called Bord Snip Nua – for savage cuts in virtually all public services, UCD economist Colm McCarthy is Lenihan’s best man to take out the semi states. Can there be any doubt that this neo liberal academic will advocate anything other than the selling off of substantial tranches of public assets in enterprises such as the ESB, Dublin Airport Authority, CIE, An Post and Coilte?

Do we need any more evidence that this government lives in an upside down world where it takes into public ownership, via NAMA, the enormous property related debts racked up by cowboy speculators and their bankrollers, while preparing the ground for the selling off of crucial state assets? It bails out reckless native gamblers through multiplying the national debt while planning to put into the hands of international gamblers vital infrastructure which contributes annually hundreds of millions of euro in dividends to the exchequer and employs tens of thousands of workers in relatively decent jobs.

We have been here before. Piloted by Minister Lenihan’s aunt, former Minister for Public Enterprise Mary O’Rourke, the privatisation of Telecom Eireann graphically shows what comes first in the priorities of venture capitalists who get their hands on public assets. Like the ESB and Bord Gais, it was a profitable net contributor to the Irish exchequer when state owned, albeit bureaucratically and inefficiently run at the top, before the then Fianna Fáil led government sold us what we already owned.

The majority of ordinary people who bought modest amounts of shares were burnt by the big players who waited for a collapse in share prices before moving in and taking over. That share price collapse took place during a boom let us remember. What price would the various utilities fetch now in the midst of a recession?

Eircom subsequently passed through the hands of several highly leveraged venture capitalists none of whom sufficiently developed the necessary infrastructure. Now Ireland stands out as a laggard in the developed world in terms of the poor levels of broadband coverage.

These commercial semi-state companies and others which have gone the way of Eircom were set up in the early decades of this State precisely because the weak indigenous capitalists were incapable of developing the infrastructure. These assets were built up with public investment to a position where they are seen as ripe for asset striping by private interests. Why should we have the slightest confidence that the international financiers that have landed the world in a spectacular crisis in their lust for super profits would act differently if they got their hands on more of our infrastructure?

Our public enterprises should not be privatised but strengthened and developed further. This means ending the bureaucratic logjams that exist in some, and democratizing all, by bringing their workers to the heart of organising these enterprises. It means democratically established boards – including their customers – to run them. This would mean taking out the array of hacks appointed by government because of their connection with one or other of the establishment political parties. It means slashing the obscene salaries of the current top brass, replacing them if necessary with people who wish to serve society while earning a decent wage, without wishing to ape the greed evident in the top echelons of private banking and industry.

Like Fianna Fail, Fine Gael also wants privatisation of public assets which begs the question where the Labour Party will stand in a Coalition government.

The workers in all of the commercial, semi-state companies must learn the lessons of what has befallen the staff of Eircom, Irish Sugar and Aer Lingus post-privatisation and ready themselves for a fight to defend their jobs and the services they provide. And working people generally should stand four square with them.

It is callously throwing hundreds of thousands of people, especially the old and the sick, to the mercy of the wolves in the insurance and finance markets of the world, for whom private corporate profit is the first consideration.

It does really beggar belief that the government is planning another instalment of a neo-liberal agenda which is utterly discredited as the economic crisis rages worldwide as a result of these policies. It is particularly sickening that the proposal is to put Irish patients at the mercy of the insurance and financial markets whose reckless gambling caused the disaster of toxic debt around the world.

Minister Harney, by underfunding the public health system has done everything she can to force people into taking out private health insurance. But the recent trend has been of people pulling out of private insurance in the context of job losses and other hardships.

The case for a unified comprehensive public health care system funded by progressive taxation and free at the point of use, eliminating wasteful competition, advertising and a multiplicity of competing administrations has never been stronger.

I support the defence of the 900 jobs in VHI and would propose that workers in the private insurance sector be integrated into the public health care system rather than further adding to the swollen dole queues.

“This relentless process of liberalisation totally ignores the impact on workers and customers as well as the social functions of public postal services. The EU postal sector is a worth €94 billion and should be kept in full state ownership as a valuable public resource. Democratic control, worker and customer consultation are the answers if reform is needed in such a sector” he said.

Calling postal liberalisation a good example of market failure, Dutch MEP Dennis de Jong said “there’s no point having three competing companies delivering post three times a day” and spoke of the myth of the shrinking postal services market. “The propaganda effort being mounted by the Commission only reflects the opinions of multinationals, not customers or workers”.

Concluding the main points German MEP Sabine Wils emphasised the group’s solidarity with Greek workers in their fight against the destruction of the public sector. “The GUE/NGL will keep working to gain broader support to protect public services both within and outside the European Parliament” she said “extra-parliamentary forces are extremely important, and we will maintain our support for organisations and trade unions in their fight against deregulation”.

Click Image to Watch RTE News Coverage of Launch

Joe was intereviewed on RTE radio about the launch of the campaign and why he will be campaigning against Lisbon. Listen to the interview online by clicking here.

See the full press statement of from campiagn on their website here. Here we repost Joe’s comments from the press release.

“The Lisbon Treaty enshrines as the norm the running of essential public services for profit, including health and education. If it is passed, the EU Commission would uphold the right of big business to profit from public services, over and above the rights of workers to take action to defend these services.

“Likewise, it would intervene to prevent even a mildly progressive government from investing to improve public services as this in their view ‘distorts the market’. This is a profoundly undemocratic document, which seeks to turn right-wing economic policies into the only show in town, and this at a time when the neo-liberal policies of privatisation and liberalisation have directly led to a catastrophic collapse in the living standards and conditions of working people.”

“EU commissioners, going back to Jacques Delors, have expressed their frustration at the EU’s relative lack of military capacity, especially when compared to the US. Economic power needs to be matched by military might in their view. We reject any notion that the role of US imperialism is something for working people in Europe to aspire to. By expanding the range of situations in which European troops can intervene militarily in Article 28B, Lisbon will represent another staging post towards Delors’ dream of a fighting force to, in his words, ‘fight the resource wars of the 21st century’.”

For more on the grqnd coalition, read Joe’s press statement on this.

For more on the Lisbon Treaty his recent article on the treaty’s militarisation and privatisation agenda and how this is unchanged by the ‘guarantees’.

Lest anybody forgot, we voted on this Treaty in June of last year and by a convincing majority the Irish electorate rejected it. However, that did not please the Euro elite which was shocked at our insolence in daring to take a view different to what it has determined in our interests.

The Euro elite is comprised of the corporate or big business establishment within the European Union and the political establishment which represents it in the parliaments of Member States and in the Euro Parliament also.

The corporate establishment wields enormous influence over the Member State governments and the EU Commission as well as over other EU institutions. It has really determined the neo liberal direction that EU economic policy has been driven in over the last two decades, driving policies such as the privatisation of public enterprises and deregulation.

Initially presented as an exercise in tidying up the structures and workings of the EU, the Lisbon Treaty is now seen, correctly, as far more than that. In fact it encapsulates the strategy of the Euro elite to increase its economic and political influence across the globe. That is why we are being pressurised to vote again so that we facilitate its goal. And of course, the Irish corporate and political establishments are using the same script as their European counterparts.

Only two years ago we had another vote in this State in the form of a General Election. And considering what the major political parties promised to the voters in the economic arena contrasted with the disaster that has befallen us, there could certainly be grounds for a rerun of that election. That’s not on offer however!

Much ado is now being made of the so called legal guarantees that the Irish Government is about to secure so as to make the second coming of Lisbon palatable. It is a cruel deception of course.

Nothing is being changed in the Lisbon Treaty. It is exactly the same document that we voted on first time around. We are told that the guarantees will relate to issues such as ‘abortion, neutrality, tax and workers’ rights.’ I have news for the government. Those of us who opposed the Lisbon Treaty from the perspective of the left never raised the big majority of the issues that we are now being told we are to be reassured about.

They may have been raised by some others in opposition but they were always red herrings. What this means is that debate leading up to the second vote on Lisbon may be more narrowly focused around key issues that are intrinsic to the Treaty. This is to be welcomed as it means that we can have a serious examination of issues such as protection of public services and EU militarisation.

We have only had sight of the proposed text of the guarantees for a very short time. However, the fundamental text on which the future direction of the European Union will be based is the essential text of the Lisbon Treaty itself. This is what will count when the European Court of Justice comes to make decisions on controversial issues such as workers’ right to organise and mobilise against predatory contractors who would abuse migrant workers in undercutting agreed wage levels and working conditions in a particular industry.

Press reports indicate that there are serious objections within a number of EU Member States to giving any assurances on the question of strengthening workers’ rights. This is not surprising.

We pointed out in the course of the first Lisbon Treaty campaign that many false claims were being made by its supporters to the effect that it would rule out automatically the exploitation of workers and that judgements that were given by the European Court of Justice giving contractors the right to undermine agreed wages and conditions could not happen post Lisbon.

In fact the legal guarantees cannot address this issue to the benefit of workers’ rights since the fundamental treaties of the EU and the Charter of Fundamental Rights itself,a give priority to the rights of business to make a profit even where this means undercutting agreed norms for workers’ pay and conditions. We should not be asked to vote again only a year after we gave our verdict first time but if we must we will certainly insist that clarity rules with regard to the real meaning of Lisbon.

It really is remarkable how very embittered establishment figures and some political parties still are over their defeat in last year’s Referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

Professor Brigid Laffan is Principal of the College of Human Sciences in University College Dublin. The UCD President’s office website informs us that she was appointed Jean Monet Professor of European Politics in 1991, that she is a member of the National Economic and Social Council and was appointed by Minister of Foreign Affairs, Micheal Martin, to the Irish Government’s ‘High Level Asia Strategy group’.

In short Professor Laffan is a pillar of the establishment which, presumably, is why she was invited to address the Fianna Fail Ard Fheis last Friday evening. And she is still very angry over the Lisbon defeat.

‘If you’d landed from Mars during the referendum campaign, you would have thought Joe Higgins was the Taoiseach of the country’ fumed the Professor to the delegates. What she was complaining about was ‘access to primary radio and TV that was given to people who were essentially non representative or weakly representative.’

We are not aware that Professor Laffan ever served as a humble County Councillor or as a Dail Deputy or Member of the European Parliament. But, as somebody who is ‘non representative’ or weakly reprentative’ ,we assume she was not complaining about her own participation for the ‘Yes’ side in very many radio and tv debates during the Lisbon campaign. We presume her outrage was over citizens opposed to the Treaty having such access.

Inadvertently, Professor Laffan makes a major admission. She implicitly acknowledges that the arguments of those opposed to Lisbon made a strong impression on voters, and in fact, made a bigger impression than the very wide range of establishment figures and politicians with whom they debated. And, clearly implied, is that for the rerun of the Lisbon Treaty this Autumn, opponents of the Treaty should be cut out of media debates. A European Union more democratic and more responsive to its citizens indeed!

Taoiseach Brian Cowen was equally hurting. Also speaking at the Ard Fheis he announced a tightening up on how referenda campaigns are financed because , ‘As we all saw in last year’s referendum, the system of regulation of political fundraising and spending is capable of being undermined by those who only pay lip service to transparency. ………I want these changes to be implemented before any referendum vote so that we can reach a stage where we can finally say that no individual will be able to distort a campaign through large scale personal fortunes.’

Well now. We can be sure that Mr. Cowen knows what he is talking about here. Any Fianna Fail Leader will be quite expert on political fundraising regulations being ‘undermined by a lack of transparency’ and of individuals being able to distort campaigns through ‘large scale political fortunes’.

We learned comprehensively how this skullduggery worked from the parade of Fianna Fail officials, Councillors and TDs at various tribunals of enquiry. We know, for example, how chief Fianna Fail fundraiser, Mr. Richardson, had a suite in one of Dublin’s most expensive hotels where he could receive in appropriate style generous donations from some of those with ‘large scale personal fortunes’ who wanted to ‘distort’ a few campaigns on behalf of their favourite political party.

However, we can assume that the Taoiseach was not referring to the cabal of major developers and speculators who have infested the Fianna Fail party for over forty years to the great detriment of proper planning in this State. He was, no doubt, referring to multi millionaire Mr. Ganley who financed the anti Lisbon Treaty campaign of the Libertas group.

In the past, in this column you will have found the most stringent criticism of Mr. Ganley and of his economic agenda – neo liberalism, more arms spending, more privatisation, less regulation. But it is frankly amazing that, without a hint of embarrassment, Mr. Cowen can stand up at his Party Conference and denounce Libertas for deploying just a very few of the tactics that his party has ruthlessly used to stay in power for much of the past forty years.

Sadly for Professor Laffan and Mr. Cowen, those of us on the Left who campaigned against the Lisbon Treaty will insist again in joining the debate. No doubt there will be an attempt to use the current economic disaster to terrify people into voting ‘Yes’. That might not seem like a great idea, however, as we point to the fact that the current crash is not unconnected to the neo liberal agenda being pushed by the EU for many years

The establishment should be warned that any interference with the right of Lisbon’s opponents to freely engage in the debate on the airwaves will be strongly resisted.

The EU Commission likes to give the impression that it is a neutral body which approaches economic policy in an impartial way. It is anything but. The Commission has vigorously pushed measures to secure the privatisation of public enterprises and services which is grist to the profits of big private corporations.

Big business interests are highly organised within the EU. For example, 45 of the biggest EU based multinational corporations are organised in a group called The European Roundtable of Industrialists (ERT). Included are giants like Siemens, Royal Dutch Shell, Nestle and Heineken. Between them, they have an annual turnover of €1,300 billion and employ 3.8 million workers. Siemens alone employs 472,000 workers equal to almost one quarter of the total workforce of the Republic of Ireland!

This economic power gives big business organisations like the ERT huge political influence also. They have ready access to the EU Commission and to the governments of Member States. It is their agendas in reality that have shaped EU economic policy for decades. What is considered good for the profits of big business is good for Europe.

Little wonder then that the economic policy of the EU has been hostile to public ownership of infrastructure and services and has pushed for opening up these areas of society to profit seeking business interests. Postal services and electricity supply are just two examples.

The Lisbon Treaty lays the basis for a further extension of privatisation. It calls for a system in the ‘internal market’ to ensure ‘that competition is not distorted’ and calls for ‘uniformity in measures of liberalisation.’ This is code for hiving off to the corporate sector important parts of public services, the most profitable parts of course.

Over the last ten years, Fianna Fail/Progressive Democrat governments have implemented very right wing economic policies. Taxes for big business and speculators were slashed while vital companies like Telecom Eireann and of Aer Lingus were privatised.

Lisbon provides the mechanism for a further twist to the privatisation agenda. The EU Commission is nominated to negotiate international trade agreements on a global basis with organisations like the World Trade Organisation. With its firm neo liberal stance, the Commission can be expected to recommend that public services including health and education are obliged to allow profit seeking private corporations in.

It can then recommend this to the European Council, made up of the heads of government in the EU. Individual Member States could only exercise a veto against this if ‘these agreements risk seriously disturbing the national organisation of such services and prejudicing the responsibility of Member States to deliver them.’ But of course, the EU Commission doesn’t believe that privatisation causes such problems.

Should disputes arise between Member States and the EU Commission with the European Court of Justice being called in to make a judgement, decisions can generally be expected to go in favour of the rights of private business to make a profit. EU decisions routinely give business interests clear priority over the integrity of public services and indeed over workers’ rights.

The alternative to the neo liberal policies in the Lisbon Treaty is a socialist approach. The main corporations and major financial institutions should be put under public ownership and democratic workers’ control. In this way, resources could be planned for the benefit of the majority, public services could be improved dramatically and decent wages and working conditions implemented for workers. In essence we stand for a democratic workers’ Europe, rather than the big business club that currently operates.