Britannia Radio

GUARDIAN   13.12.08
What part of Ireland's 'no' does the EU not understand?

Asking the Irish to vote again on the Lisbon treaty is arrogant, 
insulting and undemocratic

Imagine if, following the election of Barack Obama by 52.9% of 
American voters, the Republican party, which got just 45.7% of votes, 
demanded another election. Imagine if the Republicans described 
Obama's victory as a "triumph of ignorance" - brought about by an 
"unspeakable" and "ignorant" mass of people who should have been 
"swatted away by the forces of the establishment" - and insisted on 
holding a second election so that, this time, the voters could "get 
it right".

There would be uproar, outrage, widespread disgust at such elite 
disdain for the democratic process. Well, now you know how the Irish 
people must feel. In June this year, 53.4% of Irish voters rejected 
the Lisbon treaty, against 46.6% who supported it (giving the "No" 
camp a "sweeping victory" similar to Obama's). Yet now the Irish will 
be asked to vote again. EU officials' behind-doors deal to force a 
second referendum in Ireland reveals their utter contempt for Irish 
voters, and for democracy itself. It is an historic sucker punch 
against the sovereignty of the people.

As soon as the Irish people's ballots were counted in June, their 
rejection of Lisbon was treated as the "wrong" answer, as if they had 
been taking part in a multiple-choice maths exam and had failed to 
work out that 2+2=4. Now, they will be given a chance to sit the exam 
again, "until [they] come up with the right answer," says George 
Galloway, attacking EU elitism. The notion that the Irish "got it 
wrong" exposes gobsmacking ignorance about democracy in the upper 
echelons of the EU. The very fact that a majority of Irish people 
said no to Lisbon made it the "right answer", true and sovereign and 
final. "No" really does mean no.

The Irish were subjected to a tirade of slanderous abuse when they 
dared to reject officials' carefully crafted and profound (in truth, 
overlong and turgid) document on the future of the EU. One Brussels 
official described them as "ungrateful bastards", on the basis that 
Ireland has received lots of handouts from the EU and thus should be 
more obedient to its paymaster. Pro-EU commentators blamed "populist 
demagogues" for cajoling the Irish into voting no, and said the EU's 
plans should not be "derailed by lies and disinformation".

It was widely claimed that the Irish simply didn't understand the 
treaty, and may have been confused by its "technocratic, near 
incomprehensible language" (well, they are ignorant Paddies, after 
all). Some claimed that the Irish mistakenly, possibly even 
illegitimately, had used the referendum to register disgruntlement 
with their own ruling parties. Margot Wallström, vice-president of 
the European Commission, said officials should try to "work out what 
the Irish people had really been voting against". I would have 
thought that was obvious: they were handed the Lisbon treaty; they 
said no to it.

We've been here before. When French and Dutch voters rejected the 
European constitution in 2005 (and according to Valery Giscard 
d'Estaing, the current Lisbon treaty is the "same as the 
constitution"), they were sneeringly insulted by their betters in 
Brussels. Neil Kinnock said it was a "triumph of ignorance". Andrew 
Duff, Liberal Democrat MEP, labelled the "rejectionists" as an "odd 
bunch of racists, xenophobes, nationalists, communists, the 
disappointed centre left and the generally pissed off". He asked 
whether it is wise to "submit the EU Constitution to a lottery of 
uncoordinated national plebiscites".

Clearly not, since the plebs might just reject it. The EU's attempts 
to force the constitution/Lisbon treaty through despite its 
democratic rejection, and now their offer of a few addendums to the 
Irish people, make it come across as a corrupt, archaic oligarchy, 
ensconced in its palaces, looking down at the people of Europe as a 
strange, dumb, untrustworthy blob.

All of the Irish people I know remain passionate about the idea of 
Europe. Even those who rejected Lisbon think of Ireland as European, 
and have travelled, worked and made friends on the continent. It is 
not Europe that they rejected in the referendum in June, but a 
document produced by a cut-off and aloof European elite, those 
cosmopolitan poseurs who are in reality distrustful of Europe's 
masses, whether it's the thick Irish, the xenophobic French, or the 
mysterious Turks. The Irish were being properly European; the EU is 
being merely elitist.

=========================

FINANCIAL TIMES    13.12.08

Deal to keep Lisbon vote off UK agenda

By George Parker in Brussels

Ireland confirmed on Friday that it would press ahead with a second 
referendum on the European Union's Lisbon reform treaty, but only 
after protracted late night negotiations to try to stop the plan 
reigniting controversy over the treaty in Britain.

Ireland won a number of concessions intended to make it easier to 
secure a Yes vote, reversing the Irish rejection of the text in June.

But British negotiators feared that any apparent rewriting of the 
Lisbon treaty to appease Irish voters could spark demands for renewed 
scrutiny of the text in the UK in the run-up to the next general 
election.

The Conservatives have promised to do whatever they can to block the 
treaty from coming into effect, claiming that it will "ratchet" 
European integration to an unacceptable degree.

Mr Brown's officials worked until 2.30am on Friday with the Irish 
government and officials from the French EU presidency to hammer out 
a text that satisfied Dublin while trying to keep the issue off the 
British political agenda.

Brian Cowen, Irish prime minister, emerged at the end of a two-day EU 
summit in Brussels to announce: "On the basis of today's agreement I 
am prepared to go back to the Irish people next year." Ireland will 
hold a second referendum in autumn 2009 on the treaty, which aims to 
improve the operation of the EU and to sharpen its leadership and 
presence on the world stage.

Mr Cowen won a commitment that Ireland and all other countries would 
retain the right to send a European commissioner to Brussels; the 
treaty had envisaged cutting the size of the EU's executive.

Ireland won guarantees that the treaty would not affect its military 
neutrality, its abortion laws or national tax system. Britain 
insisted that references to the treaty upholding "the protection of 
workers rights" did not gain any new legal status.

Mr Brown claimed the concessions to Ireland did not materially affect 
the Lisbon treaty, and therefore Britain would not need to reopen its 
own ratification process.

"This is acceptable to the people of Britain and meets the concerns 
of the Irish people," Mr Brown said.  [How the hell does he know it 
'meets their concerns' ? -cs]

Mr Brown incurred Tory, media and popular anger by ratifying the 
treaty in parliament, reversing a Labour promise to hold a referendum 
on the treaty's forerunner - the EU constitution.

If Mr Cowen succeeds in reversing the Irish No, the treaty could 
finally come into effect in January 2010. The Irish concessions would 
be given further legal force by their inclusion in the EU treaty to 
allow the accession of Croatia in 2010-11.

There are fears in Brussels that David Cameron could win an election 
before the treaty comes into force. The Tory leader has vowed to put 
the text to a referendum, in which he would campaign for a No VOTE