Become a columnist. Or write an article. Or head back to the homepage.

Columns

Not so Nice, After All

Yesterday I went to the polling station (putting me in a minority to start with) with every expectation of joining another minority, those people voting No to the Treaty of Nice. Having attempted to collect as much information as I could during the campaign, I was exposed to perhaps more than my fair share of Euro-Talk. During all of this, a number of points became clear to me.

Firstly, that even though I am in favour of bringing in more countries into the EU, which was the main thrust of the Nice Treaty, I was going to have problems voting in favour of it. This was because it was accompanied by other issues, with which I was unhappy.

One of my main difficulties was in reconciling the messages coming from the representatives of the European Institutions and from the proponents of the Treaty in Ireland on the issue of the Rapid Reaction Force. While in Europe they seemed to openly talk about the Force as a first step to a strong European military capability, here I was treated to mealy mouthed unconvincing reassurances that it was nothing new and Ireland's position vies a vies Europe and armed force was unchanged. Did the Yes lobby think that we couldn't hear Mr. Prodi advancing the case for a gradual move towards a European Army? And did they think we would not stop to ask, well, if there's no change then what's the treaty for?

Was I influenced by what have been described as Eurosceptic comments by Government ministers? Certainly not. If I didn't listen to them when they told me to vote Yes, why would I listen to them when they hinted I should vote No. It was this idea that people's minds are like putty, to be moulded by whatever message is sent at them which most galled me about the Yes campaign. The ministers in question were far from being intellectual heavy-weights in any case, and the level of thought in their attempts to compare Berlin to Boston amounted to little more than an elementary grasp of the rules of alliteration.

The worst offenders here were the government parties. Dessie O'Malley told me I'd be selfish to disagree with him. Mary Harney told me I'd bring disgrace upon the country, Brian Cowen ruled out a possibility of re-examining any aspect of the Treaty despite the precedent of Denmark's rejection of the Maastricht Treaty. Above all the irritatingly patronising messages, however, the one which stood out was Bertie Ahern telling me that my mind was being clouded by the disinformation of the No side.

People don't like being hectored. And that is what happened in the Yes side of this campaign. They hectored us, and told us our concerns were the result of muddled thinking, rather than convincingly showing us that they were unfounded. Yes, there was disinformation and scaremongering by some people on the No side. Yes, I was very uneasy to see some of the groups I heard agreeing with me. But I don't think that the people of Ireland voted no because Rory O'Hanlon's risible gynaecological paranoid fantasies seemed suddenly credible.

When I put my X beside No my mind was unclouded. I was not voting No to Europe. I was not voting No to enlargement, or to giving the East of Europe the same chance Ireland had to benefit from EU membership. I am proud, not sorry, that Ireland is now in a position to become a net contributor to the EU budget. But I was voting No to the Treaty of Nice, which is the decision I was asked to make.

I think that when reading the writings of the serried ranks of Yes-urging parties and groupings commenting on this result it is important to bear one thing in mind. Europe is not the Nice Treaty, and most No voters are not anti-Europeans. We are instead asking a political class who has been drifting further away from the people it represents (indeed following the European model) not to take our support for granted and not to ignore or belittle our concerns.

Pay no attention when you hear that Ireland has been embarrassed in Europe. This just means that Civil Servants from the Department of Foreign Affairs, who have a famously high opinion of themselves, have found themselves embarrassed. Also, when you are told that Ireland has now lost influence with our partners and the incoming states pay it no heed. This is bluster from a political class, (which of course includes those who comment on politics) which is angry and confused as to why we have behaved in a way that they can't understand. Think about this- the logic of this position is not to have a referendum at all in case the people won't go along with what is being planned for them. If this seems far fetched, ask yourself why we are the only country allowed a vote on the matter, and why it is that the Crotty judgement, which guaranteed us that vote was the focus of an attack by the Ireland's Chief Eurocrat, David Byrne. In truth, while they don't mind the semblance of choice which a referendum gives they cannot accept a decision which is not in accordance with their wishes. And it is this truth which underlies waffle about a democratic deficit.

One final point. After the result of the only democratic plebiscite of an EU's member states on an international treaty the Commissioner for enlargement appeared on our screens from Slovenia. He told me that Ireland's vote would make no difference to enlargement and that the Nice Treaty would continue regardless.

I wished I could have had my vote again, so I could do it all again. It was this arrogance, both from the local political class and the European one which turned off so many voters. We were told we had to vote yes, because the politicians had agreed that the Treaty would be ratified. So they became increasingly ratty with the public when we seemed to question their judgement. The people do not always agree when their political leaders tell them to take their medicine. And when that happens, it ill behoves anyone, including the Commissioner and those closer to home to ignore that message.

I look forward to the entry of other states to the European Union, and I hope that this result may prompt a period of reflection. If we are fortunate, it may even mean that it will be a better institution when they DO join.

by

Simon McGarr
10th June 2001

Topics