The EU Council having declined to publish consolidated versions of the Treaty of Lisbon, I called for consolidations of the Reform Treaty by member state governments and non-governmental organisations, such as think-tanks, research institutes or commercial publishers (although legislation including proposals should be accessible to all citizens without cost). I also discussed different reasons for publication, including Treaty provisions, agreed practices and policies of transparency and openness.
As far as I know, there are now three consolidated language versions: French, Spanish and English (all mentioned in earlier postings).
Although there is now a consolidated version of the Lisbon Treaty in English, the unjustified reticence of EU institutions and national governments merits further discussion.
I note, with satisfaction, the recommendation of the House of Lords Select Committee on European Union in its Thirty-Fifth Report, Chapter 1:
“15. We accordingly recommend that, as soon as possible, the Government deposit in Parliament a full and thorough analysis of the changes which the Reform Treaty, on the basis of existing texts, would bring about, drawing attention to the differences from existing Treaty provisions. This should include both a consolidated version of the Treaties as amended by the Reform Treaty and an in-depth policy analysis of the effect of the changes. We expect that all Departments would be involved in the preparation of this material.”
If the Lords find a consolidated version of the Lisbon Treaty necessary, why should the citizens of the European Union be denied consolidations in their own languages?
Students, teachers, researchers; local, regional, national and EU officials; non-governmental organisations; politicians at every level; journalists; lobbyists; active citizens; in every member state of the European Union there are people who need (more) accessible texts of the Treaty to be signed.
House of Lords Select Committee on European Union: Thirty-Fifth Report;