Democracy in the EU Institutions

Blair Watch | There is much debate over the Irish rejection of the Lisbon treaty, but what I’m finding interesting is how a democratic decision by an electorate is regarded in the EU institutions. Remember, most nations have ratified the treaty by shoving it through their national parliament, often with little debate.

How people respond and react will say a lot about how democratic Europe really is. This is a little difficult, with the Eurosceptics being too hungover to speak and many others keeping their heads down, but let’s see if we can round-up the blogs etc and see what we find.

Earlier I said how I overheard Andrew Duff, leader of the Liberal Democrats say ‘We will not accept this decision’. So far there is no confirmation that ZANU-PF have offered him a job as Press Spokesman.

Tory MEP Richard Corbett has a thoughful piece wondering where to go from here, but pointing out that Ireland must have an internal debate about what they want from a treaty and how to address these concerns. Stanley Crossick thinks

We already knew that the referendum is not an appropriate mechanism for approving a complex treaty. We already knew that the European Union has not successfully been ‘sold’ to its citizens. We already knew that a veto is unacceptable in a union of 27.

One wonders if he would have written the same thing about the mechanism if the vote has been Yes, but the fact that the EU hasn’t been ’sold’ is the key point.

Aiden Gibson makes a case for a Pro-Europe No vote. EU Observer supports the Lisbon treaty but reflects that the EU hasn’t made enough progress on improving democracy, thansparency or efficiency. A very interesting article.

In a disturbing development, the Irish Daily Mail has published a secret memo where EC Vice-President Margot Wallstrom will ‘tone down or delay and pronouncements from Brussels that may be unhelpful’. Bruno Waterfield of the Daily Telegraph takes up the story.

More comment is here. We will add links as we find them, please leave your suggestions in the comments.

So what’s really going on?

The EU was designed from the very start to be a top down organisation, mainly by people who were deeply affected by WWII and its aftermath. They designed a set up where ‘we know what’s best for you’ ruled the day. They also narrowed down decision making to make it more manageable, or malleable depending on your perspective.

For many years this did reasonably well and life carried on.

Today things are different. Politics has changed, on the one hand many parties have moved to the centre and blurred the lines between them. Younger readers may not know this, but in the UK there once was a very real difference between Labour the Conservatives. Really.

Faced with a preceived lack of difference or choice, allied to the rise of the internet, people became disillusioned and cynical. They also felt less involved, less interested. One aspect is the rise of single issue politics, either as a simple “Out of Europe Now’ or protests against veal calf exports, road building etc.

People still have some sort of connection to their MP, but not to their MEP’s who have unmanagabley large constituencies. They are also working in Brussels and Strasbourg, physically remote from their constituents. Indeed one reform that could be helpful is to close down Strasbourg and have one seat of government.

The Irish citizens, like a great many other countries inhabitants, would if they were allowed to, have given the EU a bloody nose. Not entirely because they want out of the EU, but they want an accountable and democratic EU. The message is clear: “We’re here, take notice of us”.

Will Europe make real and serious attempts to be open, transparent and above all, democratic? The replies of Eurocrats and Brussels insiders to the referendum will be the earliest indication.

Watch them like hawks. We disagree with UKIP as we feel there is a chance, albeit slim and against massive odds, to build an open Europe, but an essential requirement is that those employed or funded by the European institutions must be willing do do whatever it takes to ensure these fundamental reforms are discussed and implemented, and we mean a lot more action than writing meaningless, bland and turgid press releases and reports that essentially say as  little as possible or occasional maealy mouthed press conferences.

Jean -Paul Satre Famously said ‘Hell is other people’, If he’d been still around he would realise that Hell is in fact reading EU documents.

We need a real commitment to transform the European Project from a top-down institution to a bottom up one.

RSS TrackBack URL

Translate: