[ARTICLE 22a]

SINGLE MARKET:

RULES OF ESTABLISHING THE INTERNAL MARKET

REMAIN THE SAME – UNCOMPETITIVE EUROPE<= /st1:place> GOES ON

[ARTICLE 22b]

AMENDMENT TO: Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and t= he Treaty establishing the European Community (Lisbon, 13 December 2007)<= /span>

&= nbsp;

Policy Area:

Treaty= on the Functioning of the European Union, Part Three Policies and Internal Act= ions of the Union, Title I – The internal market, Article 22b

&= nbsp;

Amendment:<= /o:p>

Clause 2,&n= bsp; page 1, line 12, after ‘excluding’, insert—

‘(i) Arti= cle 2, paragraphs 40 to to 45 , inserted Title I and Articles 22a and 22b, renumbered Title Ia, amen= ded Article 23(1), inserted Chapter Ia and Article = 27a TEC (TFEU) relating to the internal market; and

(ii)’.

&= nbsp;

<= st1:City w:st=3D"on">Lisb= on Treaty: =

“= ;42) An Article 22b shall be inserted, with the wording of Article 15. In the first par= agraph, the words "during the period of establishment" shall be replaced = by "for the establishment".”

Consolidated Treaty Article(s):

“Article 15

When d= rawing up its proposals with a view to achieving the objectives set out in Article= 14, the Commission shall take into account the extent of the effort that certain economies showing differences in development will have to sustain during the period of establishment of the internal market and it may propose appropria= te provisions.

If the= se provisions take the form of derogations, they must be of a temporary nature= and must cause the least possible disturbance to the functioning of the common market.”

&= nbsp;

Expl= anation: <= o:p>

The Lisbon Treaty does not change the substance of this existing provision. The failed Eur= ope, under the rules of the internal market, will persist – the low growth, high unemployment under the single European market has failed spectacularly.

The European single market has failed. The EU’s Lisbon ag= enda – driven to making the EU a competitive economy for the 21^{st
Century – has failed and the progress reported by the UK’s key representative=
s was
one of failure and delusion. UK rapporteur for =
an EU
task force, Will Hutton, told our European Reform Forum at the time on why
“progress has been so disappointing” for the Lisbon agenda. He
agreed that the “EU is committed to four freedoms on the economic fro=
nt:
trade in goods; trade in services; the free movement of capital; and the fr=
ee
movement of labour. The presumption embedded in=
the
heart of the European Treaties is that the purpose of the whole exercise is
openness.”}

However, as a result of large scale failures in t= he economy of Europe, particularly “on business regulation” Hutton= said, “we had reached a tipping point … Business regulation in Europe has probably become counterproductive, and t= he presumption should be that regulation ought to be used as a last resort.” On the workings of the single market, he argued that “there are many design faults in the way in which institutions and processes work – for exam= ple, the lack of symmetry in relation to the inflation target – which would need to change before I would think about Britain’s membership of= the single currency area.” If British Eurosceptics and Europhiles in general have agreed that the single market in its current form does not work (or at the very least, needs radical reform), then whey would the UK Government sign a Treaty and continue to support the Lisbon ag= enda which has been proven not to work and will trash the opportunities of UK citizens, businesses for decades to come. This is a farce and the provision= s on the single market must not be accepted.

This contrasts with states wh= o benefit from the EU’s four freedoms (of g= oods, services, people and capital) but are not subject to its massive socialist = programmes. For example, those states in the European= Free Trade Area (EFTA) – as Dan Hannan MEP has= made clear – benefit from the single market but control their own fish sto= cks and energy reserves, borders, labour, employmen= t and human rights legislation and thus the citizens of those countries remain the richest, with their independent sovereign democracies intact.