Brussels must wake up and smell the (Irish) Coffee

Thursday 12th June may have marked a turning-point in the history of the European Union, as a once solidly pro-European country stood up against the European elite for the rest of Europe, denied a say on the content of the Lisbon Treaty. The ‘Yes’ campaign have used a number of excuses for this abject failure to convince the sceptical public into backing new and erosive reforms, ranging from the contention that people want more integration, and not enough was being offered, to the fact that people don’t understand either the document or the philosophy behind it. The reality is very different; Europeans are simply bored of being lied to, taken for granted and press ganged into agreements which are detrimental to the national interest. Before Brussels understands this, it has no chance of addressing the problem.
The Irish campaign was a lesson in how to lose public confidence. Only Sinn Féin, representing just over a tenth of the Irish electorate, campaigned against the Treaty, yet resoundingly 53.4% of voters opposed the implementation of this further step towards assimilation. A mixture of political scare-mongering, such as that of Fine Gael Leader Enda Kenny who argued that Ireland would ‘decide whether we want to reaffirm and strengthen our place in Europe or turn our backs on the huge progress we have achieved over the past 35 years’, inability to explain the content of the document to the public, and failure to combat widespread contempt for the political classes following the resignation of Bertie Ahern as Taoiseach contributed to the recycled Constitution’s defeat.
Also crucial was a vibrant campaign from Libertas, and Chairman Declan Ganley, who made the running and headlines, drawing attention to the fact that the Treaty handed over powers in sixty policy areas including immigration, culture, transport and the appointment of the European President and Foreign Minister. The Eurocrats in Brussels must be worried about how the threat to the Irish Commissioner, who would only have sat for ten out of every fifteen years under the proposals, was so spectacularly unpopular, and the running which was made with the, largely accurate, critique that the Treaty was chiefly about cementing European control in areas like international trade and foreign direct investment, whilst opening the door to interference in new areas, with economic interests like tax being a poignant example.
In a week where Greece, Finland and Estonia brought up to eighteen the number of countries which had ratified Lisbon, the arguments across Europe towards Ireland became more threatening as the day of reckoning drew ever closer. French Foreign Minister Bernhard Kouchner asserted that Ireland would be ‘the first victim’ if it rejected the Treaty, whilst another Frenchman, MEP Daniel Cohn-Bendit, threatened them with expulsion; ‘a referendum must have consequences: if we say ‘No’, we leave Europe’. The Irish political elite also became more and more desperate, with statements like ‘future generations of young Irish people will suffer’ and ‘if we vote No, we are saying we don’t care about…tackling climate change, energy security or future competitiveness’ coming from the major parties.
Ultimately, the ‘Yes’ campaign only won ten out of forty-two constituencies because these wild accusations were inconsistent with earlier claims by European Commissioner Charlie McCeevy that the document was hard to sell because ‘it does not bring tangible benefits to the population’. The prolixity of some very patronising arguments also turned voters off, with leading ‘Yes’ campaigner Gay Mitchell MEP announcing that as over 90% of the Dáil Éireann voted for the Treaty, that people should ‘repose some confidence in those they entrusted to negotiate’ for they ‘cannot be expected to know all the contents of a detailed Treaty’. Much more fundamental, even than such political snobbery though, was that much of Ireland , a country which has greatly benefited from EU subsidies, now feels it no longer benefits substantially.
So where does Europe go from here? If past evidence is anything to go by, probably in a totally opposite direction to the will of residents in the twenty-seven member states. Indeed, the largest coalition in the European Parliament, the EPP-ED, has already called for the ratification process to continue despite the Irish refusal, and Gordon Brown seems likely to follow suit. Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen also stated that he wished ‘to make it clear to our European partners that Ireland has absolutely no wish to halt the progress of the Union’, seemingly positioning himself to force a second poll on the issue. Labour coalition partner Eamon Gilmore has failed to support his ‘full-steam ahead’ approach, though, interestingly offering the possibility of a split in the future.
With European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso asserting that ratifications ‘should continue to take their course’, it seems the EU shall forge undemocratically ahead defying popular sentiment, again. His view, that this vote was not one against the EU, seems to be worryingly widespread, with many Irish Europhiles concluding that not enough centralisation and integration had been offered. So long as the European elite remain this out-of-touch, there is thankfully little prospect of a popular mandate for further bureaucratic institutional change.