Top Diaries

He's been no-confidenced so how much power does he have to continue to lead even a caretaker Government? Also, any idea of the public view on this? Is he liked, or is it viewed as the right outcome for him to be no-conned?

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 03:42:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Half a year ago, at the time of local and (partial) Senate elections, ČSSD was sky-high in the polls, but from then on until last onth, it was a steady decline and a rise for ODS. So who knows -- maybe the scandal that gave the opposition the occasion for the no-confidence vote turned the trend again, and we can assume majority support for the toppling; or the trend continued, and the no-confidence vote will hit back on those who pursued it.

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 03:57:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Government falls in no-confidence vote - 25-03-2009 15:27 UTC - Radio Prague

As for the government's unpopularity, there was the issue of healthcare reform -- which came up:

Speaking before Tuesday's vote, the prime minister even promised to scrap controversial health care reforms - a source of tension even within the coalition itself. But the last straw for the opposition was a recent media scandal involving Mr Topolánek's close friend, who tried to influence a Czech TV reporter. Social Democrat MP Jan Hamáček said that after this, his party decided to call the vote, even though the country currently holds the presidency of the European Council.

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 04:13:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Centrum pro výzkum veřejného mínění - Sociologický ústav AV ČR, v.v.i.

Ah. In the just released EP elections poll, ODS was already ahead:

Those polled who expressed willingness to participate in the elections were then asked the following open question (without a list of parties being used): `What political grouping or party are you going to vote for in the elections to European Parliament?' The answers indicate that most votes would be given to the Civil Democratic Party (ODS, 31 %) and the Czech Social Democratic Party (CSSD, 29 %), followed by the Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia (KSCM, 12,5 %), the Green Party (SZ, 6,5 %) and the Christian and Democratic Union (KDU-CSL, 5 %).

However, polling was conducted before the scandal broke (2-9 March).

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 05:24:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Well, he has tendered his resignation to President Klaus, and Klaus has to propose a new PM who has to submit to a confidence vote in the Parliament.

But, in the meantime, the current cabinet will stay as a "caretaker" government. Doesn't give them any authority for policy initiatives, but someone has to be there running things until the new cabinet comes it.

It is possible that new elections will be called in which case the "caretaker" government may be in place for many months.

Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 05:11:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

But in the unlikely event that they do get a replacement quickly, does the new Prime Minister automatically become EU President? Or does Topolanek remain EU President anyway? Did anybody even bother to consider the possibility?

by gk (gk (gk quattro due due sette @gmail.com)) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 05:45:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes, the rules of procedure of the EU Council and the Treaties are all worded in terms of "the minister" or "the head of state or government". There is not a separate act of appointing someone as EU Council President: the presidency is held by the Member State.

Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 06:16:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Tuesday's salon has a few links on this - apparently this happened just as Obama is due to visit next week.

They are mid way through the Presidency, talk about embarrassing for them. But it does also beg the question of how this will impact on EU policy making at a really crucial time for us with the economy.

Which country is due up for the next Presidency, can they start early?!

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 03:40:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I think it is Sweden.

by Fran on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 03:43:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

It is Sweden starting July 1st. Then Spain, Belgium, Hungary, Poland and Denmark in 2012.

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 04:33:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Government's fall may weaken Czech EU presidency, slow down reforms - 25-03-2009 15:27 UTC - Radio Prague

They are mid way through the Presidency, talk about embarrassing for them.

I say good riddance. But here is a Czech political analyst thinking similarly, and thinking even more broadly:

As you said we are in the middle of the EU presidency, we are in the middle of an economic crisis - how much damage will this do?
"Well, as far as this government is concerned I think that many people wished for it to go, but at the same time I think it was very unfortunate that this government was defeated in the middle of the Czech EU presidency. Not that it has not happened in the history of the EU, but the Czech Republic is one of the newer members and this will be seen by the rest of the EU as another sign of instability and a lack of trustworthiness on the part of the new members as such. So in a way the Czech Republic has just damaged not only its own reputation but also that of the other new members.

Well, that might happen... in which case, I find it ridiculous that four years after accession, I have a better picture of what goes on in another new member state (see my story from last week) than the foreign ministers and PMs/Presidents of EU-15 states. (I heard the other day that Germany had to prepare a new analysis of the Czech situation.)

I think that as of now the presidency will be very inefficient simply because the Czechs will be reduced to organizing meetings and taking care of organizational matters but as far as political leadership is concerned I think that other countries will take over simply because a government that does not have legitimacy at home can hardly have any legitimacy on the European level."

Given what the Czech Presidency excelled in so far, I again say: so what.

how this will impact on EU policy making at a really crucial time for us with the economy.

I don't know about the EU, but as for the Czech Republic, I read on the political analyst's take with glee:

Government's fall may weaken Czech EU presidency, slow down reforms - 25-03-2009 15:27 UTC - Radio Prague

We are also in the middle of an economic crisis, there are reforms to be undertaken. Does this spell an end to reforms in the country?
"Yes, I think that the Czech Republic will not see any reforms for at least a year or two because whatever government takes over before the elections it will not be able to introduce any reforms and of course any new government will need time, so at least for a year or two we will not see any reforms in the Czech Republic. But then, we don't really need any radical reforms at this point, what we need is a good manager, that is a government that manages things well, is able to respond to various concrete crises and meet the needs of entrepreneurs and people who are loosing jobs - and for that I don't think we need any significant reforms but the problem is of course that even this role - the role of manager - may be undermined now."

In contrast, the coming government change in Hungary could be a reformists' wet dream. (At the party conference over the weekend, the PM conducted a tricky resignation, designed to ensure his political survival as party head -- he was indeed re-elected with great majority --, in a strong position in picking the next PM, who is now expected to be an "expert" who could ram through reforms without being held up by party-political wrangling.)

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 04:46:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I don't think it will have much effect on the EU machine. The Presidency has a certain latitude to set the agenda at the European Council and even the Council of the European Union - but it is largely a formal post - in the direction the Israel President, for example.

The Commission President has a great deal more influence.

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 05:02:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Depends on the person in post maybe. If you have a real driver for a particular policy direction and persuasive in getting others onboard then you potentially suffer a blow if they are lost in such a way. I don't know if that can be said for the Czech presidency so far though.

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 06:15:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I agree, congratulations are in order.

But, what a mess. Alas, it's going to take the death of the generation which grew up in opposition behind the so-called Iron Curtain before things evolve in the former Warsaw pact, I fear.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 07:20:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Yep in general -- but, as for government stability mess, that happens in democracies everywhere: think for example of the Belgian mess, or the disintegration of Haider's party in the Austrian federal goverment and the snap elections there more recently, or the sad endgame in Germany's Hessen state, or any number of mid-term coups resulting in a new PM. (Tho', at the moment I can't think of anything but 1968 in post-war France, so your notion of how stable governments should be may be under that impression.)

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 08:18:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Seems to me the government in Prague was pretty stable prior to the late '80's...

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 12:13:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Well, between 1968 and 1989 at least :-)

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 03:41:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ha!

1968, way before my time.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Fri Mar 27th, 2009 at 09:24:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Czech Opposition Wants Govt To Complete EU Term - World - Javno

You Read It Here First! I analysed the situation in advance in Reason for hope: when Eurosceptics oppose a Lisbon referendum.

What's next? It's worth to remember that Paroubek told over the weekend:

"We believe the government will fall next week," Paroubek told a televised speech to his party congress.
"For several weeks the cabinet can carry on its mandate in resignation, practically until the end of the European presidency. It should finish what it has begun. We all know it is a matter of only several weeks."

...and back in February, he considered this timetable:

Czech opposition thinking of Lisbon referendum - press - ČeskéNoviny.cz

Paroubek hopes that he could thus win over some rebels from the Civic Democratic Party (ODS, senior coalition government member) and with them topple its shaky government through a no confidence vote, MfD writes.
Paroubek is thinking of holding the referendum along with early elections, perhaps in the autumn, MfD writes.

Now, this is what Topolánek himself says:

Government falls in no-confidence vote - 25-03-2009 15:27 UTC - Radio Prague

I'll deliver my resignation to the president, as the Constitution says. We believe the president should also follow the custom and appoint me to form a new government."

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 04:12:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

There is no clear constitutional procedure what to do - the cabinet brings the resignation to the president but they somehow continue 'ruling'. Like after previous 100-100 elections in 2006 the former CSSD cabined led the country for two months (IIRC).

Also, today Klaus, after accepting Topolanek's resignation, announced that whoever brings him 101 signatures, will become the prime minister.

by jv (euro@junkie.cz) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 11:29:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

jv:

today Klaus, after accepting Topolanek's resignation, announced that whoever brings him 101 signatures, will become the prime minister

How long before Klaus has to call new elections?

Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 11:31:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

ICL - Czech Republic - Constitution

Article 35 [Dissolution]

(1) The President of the Republic can dissolve the Chamber of Deputies if:
a) the Chamber of Deputies passes a vote of non-confidence in a newly appointed Government whose Premier was appointed by the President of the Republic on the suggestion of the chairman of the Chamber of Deputies,
b) the Chamber of Deputies fails to decide within three months on a Government bill with the discussion of which the Government links the question of confidence,
c) a session of the Chamber of Deputies is adjourned for a longer period than admissible,
d) the Chamber of Deputies has not reached a quorum for a period longer than three months, although its session was not adjourned and although it was repeatedly called to session during this period.
(2) The Chamber of Deputies cannot be dissolved three months before the expiration of its election term.

Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 11:37:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes, that. The last time Czech republic had premature elections the parliament had to amend the constitution to shorten it's own term.

by jv (euro@junkie.cz) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 01:11:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Now, if the Chairman of the Chamber of Deputies proposes a PM candidate to Klaus, can he refuse to appoint him? Because that's what this means:

Klaus, after accepting Topolanek's resignation, announced that whoever brings him 101 signatures, will become the prime minister

Is he saying that if he gets a proposal without 101 signatures he won't act on it?

Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 01:26:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Czech constitution Article 68:

(2) The Prime Minister shall be appointed by the President of the Republic who shall appoint on the Prime Minister's proposal the other members of the Government and shall entrust them with the direction of individual ministries or other agencies.
(3) Within thirty days after its appointment the Government shall present itself to the Chamber of Deputies and shall ask it for a vote of confidence.
(4) If a newly appointed Government fails to win the confidence of the Chamber of Deputies, the procedure specified in paragraphs 2 and 3 shall be followed. If a thus appointed Government again fails to win the confidence of the Chamber of Deputies, the President of the Republic shall appoint a Prime Minister on the proposal of the Chairman of the Chamber of Deputies.

Now, I honestly don't know how are the attempts should be counted - but it seems the current understanding is that the counter reverts to zero after a cabinet wins vote of confidence. (Yes, our constitution is still young and full of bugs).

Therefore, right now, Klaus has two attempts to appoint whoever he wants and only then, should both fail, he would be constitutionally bound to appoint anyone proposed by the Chairman.

by jv (euro@junkie.cz) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 01:56:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Klaus, Bem, and Tlusty behind the government's fall

Klaus is deemed the biggest victor of all this mess. On Saturday, he appeared at the CSSD congress, which was highly unusual, and which is probably where the Tuesday scenario was written.

Topolanek blamed both Klaus and Bem (Prague mayor whom Klaus unsuccessfully tried to push as ODS chairman a couple months ago) for his defeat.

One of the ODS defectors, eventually voting against the government, explicitly stated that Klaus's position was decisive in his vote.

Topolanek said that celebrations in Hrad (seat of the President) continued from 1:30 am till morning, and also that Kremlin and Russian embassy were celebrating (opposition is also opposed to ratification of radar agreements). He actually said that at CSSD headquarters, they also celebrated, but just "a bit". So, somehow, he's starting to maneuver into the big coalition with CSSD?

by Sargon on Fri Mar 27th, 2009 at 06:34:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Is Klaus engineering a crisis to make sure both Lisbon and the Missile Shield are defeated, as he opposes both?

Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Mar 27th, 2009 at 06:39:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

He can't engineer anything without Paroubek, so I wonder what Klaus's appearance at the conference means for Lisbon.

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Fri Mar 27th, 2009 at 06:47:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

It's a mess, obviously. Klaus just wants to be at the helm, and he's using any means available to pursue this goal. Appointing prime minister is one of the few occasions when his word is decisive, and so he was pretty happy to let Tuesday happen.

I'd speculate that opposing Lisbon is more important to him than opposing radar, though. I won't be surprised if he lets Topolanek back in, after certain amount of groveling. Letting ODS back in, but without Topolanek, is a higher probability event, IMHO.

I have no idea what does this mean for Lisbon, other than the schedule is shifted back.

by Sargon on Fri Mar 27th, 2009 at 07:49:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

How do ČSSD comment Topolánek's rampant Russophobia? (My guess is: not at all, but it's more interesting if I am wrong.)

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Fri Mar 27th, 2009 at 06:49:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

It's dangerous to be in any way either pro-Russian or anti-Russophobic in Czech politics these days, so I won't expect any commentary from Paroubek - he's way too smart for this.

Russian sources just reported that Klaus will head Czech presidency's delegation at May Russia-EU summit.

by Sargon on Fri Mar 27th, 2009 at 07:55:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Sargon:

Russian sources just reported that Klaus will head Czech presidency's delegation at May Russia-EU summit.

That should be fun.

Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Mar 27th, 2009 at 08:03:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes, for once, EU and Russia could speak the same language :)

by Sargon on Fri Mar 27th, 2009 at 08:44:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

This may be a dumb question, but I'm no EU expert. Isn't there a line of succession for the EU presidency? Is the presidency awarded to the country? Is there any rule stating the the head of the government, or the head of state, the only person who can fill the post? Is it left up to the country to fill the post by any process it deems fit? (by national plebiscite, appointment by the head of state, or whatever?)

I read in some radio Prague email that I got that some in the CR felt that Topolanek would continue as EU President regardless of the outcome of the vote. I don't even know if that is legally possible, though. I haven't been paying attention to this like I ought.

"It Can't Be Just About Us"
--Frank Schnittger, ETian Extraordinaire

by papicek (papi_cek_at_hotmail_dot_com) on Fri Mar 27th, 2009 at 02:05:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

The Council of the EU (the main intergovernmental body, which can 'materialise' as a council of specialist ministers as well as that of heads of states/governments) presidency is awarded to a country (resp. its government) for pre-set six-month periods. The semi-official European Council (the get-together of heads of states/governments, which is to be made a full-blown insitution with Lisbon) has no clear rules, it is left to the countries whom they send. Consequently, there can be some wrangling, as happened with Poland when President Kaczyński and PM Tusk memorably tussled over who should go.

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Fri Mar 27th, 2009 at 06:44:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/26/world/europe/26czech.html?_r=2&hp

I found a link at Talking Points Memo that leads to this NY Times article on the situation:

Sounds like this guy will stay in - but it is ironic that he trashed Obama and then got the no-confidence vote. Rather a big mess, it seems...

"Once in awhile we get shown the light, in the strangest of places, if we look at it right" - Hunter/Garcia

by whataboutbob on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 03:52:09 AM EST

He trashed Obama because the ODS are "fiscal conservatives" like the rest of the EPP.

Imagine if US fiscal policy was devolved to the States and you had to agree a response to the crisis in a conference of all 50 governors, including "fiscally conservative" Republicans.

Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 06:45:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

With the difference that member states here can be kicked out.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 07:19:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Can they?

Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 07:33:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

More or less. In the Treaty of Nice. They can have their membership rights fully suspended.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 07:46:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes, but that is a different thing.

It was done to Austria in the 1990's when Haider joined the government.

Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 08:05:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm pretty sure the Treaty of Nice both formalises this and makes it more draconian than what was done to Austria in the 1990's.

Speaking of which, if Haidar was worth all that, why don't we have proceeding on Italy too?

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 12:15:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nobody expects any better of Italy, sadly.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 12:21:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Also, the EU was a different place then. Nobody thinks a fascist government is reason for critisism any more.

Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 12:37:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I suspect the same; but, can you track down a transscript or a longer quote of Topolánek's words? I wonder what (if anything) was the context.

_{*Lunatic*, n.

One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

by DoDo on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 08:20:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

There is an audio sample here: MEPs debate the outcome of the Spring European Council with Czech PM Topolánek

In his opening speech, the Czech prime minister firmly refuted arguments that the EU was not doing enough to tackle the economic situation, highlighting the €400 billion stimulus package agreed by EU Member States and - one the "biggest successes of the summit" - the €75 billion to be provided to the IMF to boost its financial capacity.

However, he criticised the US government's spending plans and its growing budget deficit and said the greatest success of the EU summit had been its "refusal to go this way".

EU leaders, he said, had emphasised the need for better regulation, and here he stressed the role of Parliament in adopting future legislation on matters such as ratings agencies, solvency requirements and capital adequacy of banks.

Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 09:29:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You should be able to find it here: Plenary sittings : Verbatim report of proceedings: most recent debates

The verbatim report of proceedings of each sitting (often referred to by its French abbreviation, CRE) is published (Rule 173 of the Rules of Procedure) and contains the speeches made in plenary, in the original language.

Except that the transcripts for March 25 are not up yet. Maybe tomorrow?

Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 09:36:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

As to the news, it's even funnier. Apparently when Topolanek was speaking the interpreter mistranslated his speech a bit.
From Topolánkův tlumočník málem způsobil mezinárodní skandál (Topolanek's interpreter almost caused international scandal.

"Ta cesta (USA) je nebezpečná v tom, že na financování svých sociálních stimulů budou potřebovat Američané hotovost. Tu získají jednoduše, protože americké bondy (dluhopisy) si vždy někdo koupí, ohrozí to však likviditu trhu"

my quick translation:

That way (US) is dangerous in that, that for financing their social stimulus will the Americans need cash. And that they can get easily, because there will always be someone to buy american bonds, although it will endanger the liquidity of the market.

He did use czechised (is that a word?) english word "bondy", the interpreter heard "bomby" - "bonds" and even added "weapons". So it became "... because there will always be someone to buy american bombs and weapons".

You can't make this stuff up ;)

by jv (euro@junkie.cz) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 11:26:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

He trashed Obama on Wednesday, one day AFTER he lost the vote.

by jv (euro@junkie.cz) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 11:15:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

European Tribune - Czech Government Topples & EU Loses its President

Who and what was behind this, and what happens next?

For background, see

Reasons for despair: Lisbon Missile Treaty by Colman on March 20th, 2009
Reason for hope: when Eurosceptics oppose a Lisbon referendum by DoDo on March 21st, 2009

Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 04:58:59 AM EST

From Prvně radar, pak Lisabon, trvají na svém senátoři ODS (First Radar, Then Lisbon, ODS Senators Insist)

Pádem vlády zřejmě přestaly platit dříve uzavřené dohody, domnívá se část senátorů. To podle nich může zapříčinit zamítnutí Lisabonské smlouvy.
"Byla podmíněna například tím, že dolní sněmovna odhlasuje smlouvy o radaru. Teď už žádné dohody pravděpodobně platit nebudou. A ve chvíli, kdy nebudou platit, tak nebude platit ani rozložení hlasů," řekl deníku Aktuálně.cz senátor Tomáš Töpfer (zvolen za ODS).
Připustil, že smlouva by mohla být i zamítnuta. "Možná se dočkáme něčeho úplně nevídaného."

With the fall of the cabinet the previous agreements are no longer valid, some senators think. That can cause rejection of the Lisbon treaty.
"It was conditioned, among others, upon passage of the radar treaties by the lower house. Now the agreements most probably won't be valid anymore. And when they are no longer valid, so won't be the votes [jv: in senate, i think]", told Aktualne.cz senator Tomáš Töpfer (elected on ODS ticket).
He admitted that the treaty could be even rejected. "Perphaps, we'll see something extraordinary".

by jv (euro@junkie.cz) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 01:23:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

jv:

With the fall of the cabinet the previous agreements are no longer valid

Which agreements? The horse-trading between Topolánek and his Senators?

Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 at 01:27:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]