Whilst warning of the danger that the EU will lose ‘credibility’, it has presented its wish list: an agreement on the financial perspective, reaffirming that this should ‘act in the interests of pursuing the Lisbon agenda’; the prompt establishment of the internal services market (it is revealing that, by way of justifying the liberalisation of services, UNICE argues that this is an ‘essential element of the Lisbon Strategy’ and a ‘requirement of the Treaties’, backed by rulings made by the European Court of Justice – and then tries to ‘sell’ us the idea that the so-called European Constitution has nothing to do with this ...); and the ...[+++] liberalisation of world trade within the framework of the World Trade Organisation.

I asked it to look at this within a year and the sunset clause within two years, to allow enough time to do what it takes to find a solution that satisfies everyone.

I told them that I didn't understand, that I had put my own money into the case, that I had gone to the Federal Court, to the Supreme Court and that I hadn't been listened to, I hadn't been heard and that the court did not want to hear me because it was not in the public interest.

So we have gone along with this and said that we accept emissions trading.

Reinforced cooperation is like an eel trap. There is no way back, but only ever more integration, more centralisation and more Brussels, without the corresponding democracy.

If a proposal is rejected for no reason by the banks, which is what happened in my case, a shareholder can take the matter to court, that is he can file suit in either Quebec or Ontario Superior Court and demand the right to submit proposals and have shareholders vote on them.