Lisbon Treaty head to head: No

In our head to head on the Lisbon Treaty, below John Mc Guirk of Libertas argues for a No vote in the
upcoming Irish referendum, while Eric Keane of Young Fine Gael calls for a Yes vote here.

The European Union is almost universally acknowledged to suffer from what is known as a “democratic deficit”.  This refers to the fact that there exists a large gulf between the ordinary citizen and those who are responsible for generating the 80 percent of Irish law that emanates from Brussels.

The European Union has immense influence over the lives of almost half a billion people - but those responsible for initiating Union policy are appointed, not elected.

They are answerable to national governments, but domestic political considerations hugely outweigh any degree to which those governments can be held responsible for the actions of people appointed collectively by 27 Prime Ministers.

The European Parliament, the only one of the Great EU institutions which is directly elected by the people, is the weakest and least consequential of Europe’s institutions, and it will remain so after Lisbon, despite getting very modest additional responsibility.

In addition, any election to the EU Parliament is almost exclusively fought on domestic political ground, rather than on a substantive debate on EU policy. In Ireland, the opposition will almost always urge the electorate to give the Government a “kicking” during the parliament elections. This conflicts, of course, with their telling people to not do so during EU referenda, because the issues are “too important”.

We can see the consequences of the democratic deficit in Brussels already. For 13 years, the EU has failed to have its accounts signed off by the Union’s own court of auditors.

A report on corruption in the EU parliament is, openly and shamelessly, being withheld from publication indefinitely. The Department of the Taoiseach itself estimates that “unnecessary” regulation from Brussels costs Irish Business hundreds of millions annually. In a democratic Union, – or in any democratic state, this state of affairs would be punished by the electorate.

Lisbon entrenches and makes much more severe the lack of democracy in Brussels.

It provides for a President of the Council, and what in effect amounts to an EU Foreign Minister, both of whom are being provided for in order to solve the old problem spotlighted by Henry Kissinger – “When I want to talk to Europe, who do I call?” Both positions will have the power to speak collectively for all of Europe on the great global issues of the day, and neither will have a mandate from the people. Isn’t that a problem?

Why would it be difficult to elect both positions directly? Such an exercise in democracy would bring Europe together, and provide the people elected with a mandate to tackle issues like corruption in the Union, and to speak for all of Europe with real moral authority. Instead, the EU is being made even more powerful, and at the same time, yet more remote from the people.

In our view, Lisbon is symptomatic of the contempt for the democratic will that has become all pervasive in Brussels.

This document is almost identical to a document democratically rejected, twice, by two of the Union’s founding members. It has been altered slightly, and now it its ratification is happening over the heads of the very people who rejected it in France and the Netherlands.

No true democrat can watch this happening without feeling very severe disquiet, can they? Proponents of the Treaty are often keen to say how it “streamlines” decision-making in Brussels, and how it “makes Europe more efficient”. Democracy by its nature isn’t efficient. We feel that every time Brussels takes a decision that affects the lives of half a billion people, that decision should be difficult. We should say No to this Treaty.

- John Mc Guirk, spokesperson Libertas

MORE: Lisbon Treaty head to head: Yes 
MORE: Majority of students in dark over EU treaty