All for Europe

This poster caught my eye the other day. I did a sort of a double take.

FOR EUROPE?
I had heard that one of the Libertas team had changed sides but this was really something. Caroline Simons has been an assertive spokesperson for Libertas right through the Lisbon campaign and beyond. Had she changed sides?

Then I realised I was looking at a Libertas poster. Then I remembered that Libertas were FOR EUROPE, as Declan Ganley never tired of telling us all through the last Lisbon campaign. They were for Europe but against Lisbon. Not necessarily an inconsistent position, I have to admit. I am for Europe and I was tempted to vote NO in the last Lisbon referendum as a reaction against the complacent arrogance of both our own and our European "leaders". Caroline's poster is in support of her candidacy for membership of the European Parliament in the forthcoming European elections.

Then I heard Naoise Nunn on the radio. He was the guy who had changed sides (and joined Fianna Fáil). He was now FOR LISBON. Pushing the NO campaign had been just a job, like working for Ganley (or now Fianna Fáil).

It's going to be a very confusing European election, and that before we even get withing smelling distance of a referendum.

UPDATE (21/5/2009)

This is the latest tarted up version. Subtle shift away from FOR EUROPE to HAD ENOUGH OF THAT SHOWER. Normally this would be taken as referring to the current national government. We have apparently progressed from a vote for Europe to a vote against the Government. Forget the local or European elections. What next?

Many a slip 'twixt cup and lip

I passed by the offices of the (Irish) Instute of International and European Affairs, in North Great George's Street, this morning and some little thing caught my eye.

I went back for a look and saw that some concerned citizen had removed a banana skin from the footpath and placed it harmlessly on the base of the railings.


Would that an equally concerned Government had spotted such a skin before the Lisbon referendum and quarantined it as efficiently.

Encore Sarko

This is the French Embassy Residence, in Ailesbury Road, Dublin, where today (21/7/08), President Sarkozy met NO campaigners and some of the social partners.

He stressed that he had not said the Irish should have another referendum. He is also quoted today as saying "I said that at some stage or another the Irish had to be given the opportunity to give their opinion" and "perhaps I can help Brian out of it because this is precisely the difficulty that I was up against in my own country".

These statements may seem contradictory but on closer analysis they add up to this.

A referendum is not a suitable means of ascertaining the people's wishes on such a complex issue. My predecessor, for reasons of his own, put the issue to the French people and they said NO. I, on the other hand, have obtained the consent of the French parliament. Parliament has been elected by the people. Therefore, this time round, the French people have said YES.

The implicit advice is therefore to take the matter out of the direct hands of the people and let their representatives decide.

There are, however, two particular considerations in the Irish case. At the end of the day it is up to the Supreme Court to decide if a referendum is needed on the specific content of the current, or a modified, Lisbon Treaty, and it is not clear what their view would be. Also, having said NO once, and given the practice of deciding these matters by referenda, a practice introduced at the behest of the Supreme Court originally, the Irish people might not be too happy to accept the delegation of the choice in this matter to their elected representatives.

Indeed, these representatives might be very hesitant to take on the responsibility of saying YES on behalf of a reluctant populace, if they want to stay elected next time round. It could certainly make for a very interesting next general election.


Despite all the talk, the matter was clearly not solved today, nor is it expected to be during the current French EU presidency.

Perhaps that is why the EU flag was still flying upside down in front of the Embassy residence long after Sarko had departed.

Previous posts:
Les pieds dans le plat
La Poupée qui Fait Non
27-1=0
Lispin Liospóin

Les pieds dans le plat

Here we go again. You can't get away from it.

"Ye did the wrong thing and it needs righting."

And his forthcoming visit is shortening by the hour to the loud sound of closing doors.

For a louder sound yet check out the inauguration of the ultimate anti-French device.

This one has been around for over 200 years and seems to have proved effective first time round.

Last Chance Saloon

Readers of this blog will know by now that I have a soft spot for St. Andrew's church in Westland Row, in the centre of Dublin city. After all, this is where, at a very tender age, I first joined the Mystical Body.

Readers will also know that there is wide international interest in this church and that I have responded to this interest by uploading some pictures of St. Andrew himself on his lofty perch.

Well, I passed the church again today and saw the sign in the above photo.

"Aha", I thought, "the universal church has seen the error of its ways in allowing that scurrilous rag ALIVE to engineer the rejection of the Lisbon treaty and it is now praying to the Lord to give the people of Ireland a second bite at the cherry. Not only that, it is invoking the biggest gun in the church's armoury, the mass, to this end."

So I decided to call into the parish office to test my divine theory. Imagine my surprise, and disappointment, to be told that these masses were a regular fortnightly occurrence and were simply a chance for those who had left the church to return to the fold.

So be warned - this is your last chance to square up your account before you are run over by the proverbial bus.

"Rubbish", I hear you think, "In this gridlocked city? No chance!"

But beware the QBC. Bus Átha Cliath are way ahead of you on this one.

27 - 1 = 0

It's just as well an upside down tricolour (the normal distress mode) is not noticeable. Unfortunately the same can't be said for the EU flag!

What was the Lisbon Treaty?
It was essentially housekeeping to allow the Union to function effectively with 27 Member States. However, it also involved some changes which were significant enough for the Government to opt for a constitutional amendment in Ireland.

     Significant changes

• rotation of Commissioners
  
• voting base/shares in Council
  
• move to QMV (integration of 2nd & 3rd pillars)
  
• new procedure for amending the Treaty
  
• incorporation of Human Rights Charter
  
• strengthening of EU's legal personality
  

    Not in Treaty

• abortion
  
• direct tax harmonisation
  
• mutual defence pact overriding "neutrality"
  
• conscription
  
• undermining of minimum wage
  

Who is to blame for Ireland's NO

Successive governments since 1972 who presented the EU as essentially a cash cow - from Paddy Hillery's "de CAP and de LONG RUNS" to de Nortside Teeshocks "LOONEYS 'N' LOO LAHS". It was too much of an effort (intellectually and otherwise) to communicate the broader motivation behind the project: prevention of war; more rational use of resources at a European level; counterweight to the USA; spread of democracy and rule of law within and without the Union (eg by promise of membership to the east), etc.

No surprise then that when a new Treaty doesn't bring more cash, and when we are turning into a net contributor rather than a net beneficiary, the people have no further use for the project.

The EU is frequently blamed for unpopular government decisions, instead of the rationale for the decision and its place in the overall project being put forward. We have, explicitly or implicitly, had a hand in every decision taken since we joined and it is irresponsible, and counterproductive in the longer term, to "blame" others. This contributes to the "them foreigners and us Irish" attitude which led to such posters as "No to Foreign Control" during the campaign being taken seriously. Divil the bit of "pooled sovereignty" in evidence when we're giving out about EU decisions!

There has surely been a serious "democratic deficit" in Ireland's involvement with the Union but most of this has been within the country and under our own control. In Council negotiations, for example, the Danes have for years been entering "scrutiny reserves" - these effectively meant that they were witholding consent to whatever proposal was on the table until they (government and parliament) had a chance to digest it and come to a considered view on it.

The Treaty was actually tackling what remained of a "democratic deficit" at the European level.

The YES campaign started too late. Instead of presenting a negotiating triumph to the public and forcing the opposition to challenge it, they let the opposition sow the seeds, largely unhindered, and were then on the backfoot defending the invisible.

The YES parties did not get the vote out. Much of the NO vote was, no doubt, an informed NO, but there were a lot of people who voted NO on the basis that they did not understand what was involved and were not prepared to commit to the unknown. The lackluster and defensive campaign of the YES side, combined with the usual complacency, meant that many of the potential YES voters stayed at home. Some voters stayed at home on the basis that the issues had not been sufficiently explained to enable an informed decision to be made. One of my intelligent relations fell into this category.

Other leaders across the EU who showed, or were reported without challenge as showing, their utter contempt for the democratic process, boasting of the obscurity of what was being put to the people, and, in some cases implicitly criticising the Irish decision to put the matter to a referendum.

All the elites for their complacency about Europe and their craven obeisance to an increasingly paranoid and immoral USA. The EU was supposed to be a counterweight to the USA in more than just economic terms but it seems to be knuckling under to the wilder demands of the current neo-con régime.

The actual loonies and loo lahs who blatantly lied their way through the campaign in a way reminiscent of the red scare tactics of the establishment in my youth.

At the beginning of the campaign I had more or less made up my mind to vote NO based on a sense of outrage at the sometimes dismissive and sometimes threatening attitude of those who would be leading us under this project if passed. On reflection, having read up on the Treaty (to a certain point), and given my broader empathy with the European project, I decided that voting NO would be cutting off my nose to spite my face so I voted YES.

There is an arrogance at the heart of the project which needs to be fought from within. It should not, however, put us off a project which is worthy in itself.

What are the consequences of the NO vote?

    for Europe

If matters remain as they are now, the project, in the longer term, stands a good chance of paralysis and increasing acrimony and even disintegration. It is worth remembering here that the gap between the elites and those they represent is widespread throughout the community. The French and the Dutch rejected the constitution. Other countries are not having referendums on the Treaty but the opinion polls do indicate a significant gap.

Alternatively, and most likely, some form of enhanced cooperation between the willing will emerge and the project will inch forward with Ireland on the sideline.

    for Ireland

However much we may try to console ourselves that we took a stand against the behemoth in the interest of the small folk, any political capital we had accumulated in Brussels, and further eastwards, and there was a lot, is now gone and we are likely to be increasingly effectively marginalised.

The rules as written will be observed, but as we often point out ourselves when boasting about how we punch above our weight, the real world also works on influence and alliances. We may now see that more clearly in operation from the outside. We have effectively deprived our oft lauded diplomats of that edge which they have used so well up to now on our behalf.

One of the first causes to suffer will be the ridiculous Irish language project which I have commented on earlier. This depended on goodwill, not only from the Commission, but from all the Member States. Stádas will now simply become Stad, cut off in its primeval prime.

This will likely be the least of our worries, however. The Government are now being sent back by the people to Brussels to "renegotiate a more favourable Treaty". It is hard to see how this can be done when all our concerns were actually covered in the one we have just rejected.

This is more than the rejection of a single treaty. It is a flock of political chickens coming home to roost.

I am reminded of an ancient German proverb which I was introduced to in the 1960s when we were still knocking at the door of the Common Market trying to get in. My failing recollection and ungrammatical German renders it thus:

Das Leben ist wie eine Hühnerleiter, kurz und beschissen.

Time to fly the coop!