February 12, 2008...6:12 pm
Sunday Times: Lisbon treaty: yes, no or eh?
January 13th, 2008
Are you a good citizen? I like to think I am. I pay my taxes, I would happily sit on a jury if only I were asked (jumping up and down outside the Courts Service office shouting “Pick me!” appears to have no effect) and I make sure to cast an informed vote in elections and referendums. So with a poll due on the Lisbon treaty, I figured it was time to do some research and find out what all the hoopla is about.
Having scanned newspaper articles and half-listened to radio debates, I knew the treaty is a replacement for the ill-fated European constitution that was rejected by French and Dutch voters in 2005, and that it amends the earlier treaties of Maastricht and Rome.
I was also aware that those in favour of the treaty (Europhiles, most of our political parties) say it is required to streamline the functioning of the European Union. The anti-treaty lobby (Sinn Fein, the liberal think tank Libertas) say the treaty will undermine Irish sovereignty.
Who’s right? I had assumed there would be a neutral website run by the Referendum Commission, outlining the pro- and anti-treaty arguments. There isn’t. Neither will an information pamphlet be sent out to every home in the country, as has happened in every referendum debate since 1998.
The government has set up a website, reformtreaty.ie, but it’s not a huge amount of help. It contains a fairly slight selection of press releases, speeches and other information, including a five-page booklet that is supposed to summarise the key issues. A summary of the summary: the treaty is great – vote “Yes”.
Libertas.org is a lot classier-looking than the government site. If I were to make a call based on design principles only, the nays would have it. Unfortunately, the Libertas site is a bit ranty (John Gormley is an “unprincipled, amoral, power hungry political animal”) and assumes too much knowledge on the part of the reader. In summary: the treaty is dreadful – vote “No”.
As I flicked backwards and forwards between the two sites, I started to feel all spun out. Each side is vigorously pushing an agenda rather than providing a rational analysis. I was going to have to read the damned treaty myself.
My determination to do this wavered slightly once I realised it’s 287 pages long, but I steeled myself and got stuck in. The first 10 pages comprise the title and a list of the 27 heads of state, followed by space for their signatures. So far, so good. If the rest is this straightforward, bring it on, I thought.
About half-way down p11, somewhere around the line, “In the eleventh, which shall become the twelfth, recital, the words ‘of this Treaty’ shall be replaced by ‘of this Treaty and of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union’”, I got to thinking how it’s a shame they don’t put a table of contents in these things. It’s even more of a pity they don’t flag the parts you need to read, maybe by using different-coloured text – grey for the boring bits, green for interesting changes, red for the really controversial stuff.
Unfortunately, it’s all in black and white and I had to plough on. There was some good stuff on page 14, about how the EU is keen on peace, freedom, security, justice, cohesion, solidarity and diversity. That all sounded fine - they probably also approve of motherhood and apple pie. Then, further down the page, this: “the Union shall establish an economic and monetary union whose currency is the euro”.
Hang on - didn’t that happen already? Now I was worried. If some of what the new treaty is adding to the old treaties has already come about, how would I know which of the new provisions are really new and which aren’t? I considered taking each point in the treaty and looking it up separately, but I had already spent half an hour reading and there were 273 pages to go. I stuck at it.
Some hours later, I made it to page 25. I was hungry, tired, dispirited and suffering a thumping headache. You tend to get migraines when you read sentences like “The use of Union competences is governed by the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality” over and over again, without ever coming to understand what they mean.
And so it went on. Evening became night and late night melted into early morning. Still I read and the more I read, the more confused I got. Even though I have a postgraduate degree in international relations, I still couldn’t make head or tail of most of it. The treaty is so vast, unwieldy and turgid that only the truly dedicated will ever to get to grips with it. If I had a few weeks to spare, I might be able to unravel its complexities and make an informed decision, but I can’t put my life on hold while I parse sub-clauses on proportionality.
An Irish Times/TNS mrbi poll last October found 25 per cent of Irish people would vote Yes to the Lisbon treaty, 13 per cent would vote No and 62 per cent didn’t know or had no opinion. I’m expecting that 62% won’t change much even when the electorate finally tries to figure out what this treaty is all about.
So I find myself in the unusual position of pleading with the government to make a U-turn. Ask the Referendum Commission to send out a neutral and clearly written booklet so we can make a fair and balanced decision on what is a critical vote for Ireland’s future within the European Union?
Failing that, maybe the powers that be could give me a shout for a spot of jury duty. I just want to be a good citizen.
8 Comments
March 19, 2008 at 7:32 pm
The treaty is so ambiguous, it takes a rocket scientist to filter through the endless nonsense. The Government is being honest about this treaty. They are not outlining the numerous negative consequences for the yes vote.
I will be voting no and as soon as the public becomes more aware, those polls will change. 62% of the people are unsure of how they will vote. Why? They have absolutely no idea what any of it is all about. But hopefully, we can outline it for them.
Seán Ó Briain
April 2, 2008 at 8:47 am
It’s a sad state of affairs when our government is pushing an ill informed public to vote yes on a treaty that the majority of them have’nt even read themselves. They say it’ll be great for us and all of Europe as it streamlines functionality of the EU and gives greater democracy. Please tell us what on earth they are talking about??? The Irish people are not stupid! I’ve read a lot about the treaty and I’m not happy with the fact if we vote Yes then all our laws/policies will be dictated to us and overruled by faceless bureaucrats in Europe that we will not be able to vote in or remove. How can that be called democracy?
April 4, 2008 at 2:39 am
Having done quite a lot of research on this myself, I recommend to anyone who wants a straightforward guide to the changes, with no spin whatsoever, the UK Foreign Office’s comparative tables - article by article changes, available here:
http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm73/7311/7311.pdf
April 16, 2008 at 9:03 am
- My plea to the Irish people to recognize the unique historical relevance of this issue -
Please vote NO to a constitutional treaty - or any contract - that you cannot read and cannot understand. Please do NOT rely on your politicians only, and do NOT issue a blank check to anyone. Unfortunately we are living in an era when we cannot trust our politicians any longer.
Please do your own research on expert opinions and rely on your own judgment. You will discover that the pro-Lisbon advocates are supporting a giant lie: but the truth regarding the circumstances of drafting and implementing this Treaty reveal them. The main point here is that the Lisbon Treaty was ***intentionally*** prepared to be unreadable by the voters. For two reasons: 1) to hide the fact that it is the same as the former EU Constitution so that they could override the former French and Dutch referendum results, 2) to enable the member state governments to deny further referendums in the member states.
(Please read the Danish European Parliament member’s account on this: Bonde’s Briefing 19.12.07: “Born in sun and sin”
http://www.bonde.com/index.phtml?sid=487&aid=25366
For an objective analysis of the Treaty itself please read article at:
“Ireland, a vital fact proven: the Lisbon Treaty is a constitution”
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87182
The purpose of this article is to provide further support to the statement upheld by known politicians, academic and legal experts: that the Lisbon Treaty is a constitution.
The emphasis on this fact is vital because from this fact it follows that the Lisbon Treaty needs referendum not only in Ireland but in all of the 27 EU member states.
Because the Lisbon Treaty a constitution, it is crucial to understand that no constitution in a democracy ever permits the act of overthrowing it, i.e never allows the act of replacing it with another one without the permission of a country’s citizens. Therefore the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty without referendums in the other 26 states, is a dictatorial power-grab over Europe transferring the sovereignty of Europe’s nations into the central totalitarian regime of Brussels.
Also read article (and its references)
“Lisbon Treaty explained by political science: an equivalent of coup d’état”
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/86544#comment225605
I have read the treaty, all of it. I have devoted all my time - and I did suspend my life due to the historical relevance of this issue.
But the very content of the treaty is only one of the many aspects to consider. The text itself is profoundly deceiving, because in the middle of the treaty it elaborates the exact opposite of a democratic system.
Once you truly understand the text itself and the hostility of the motives behind the response is passionate, this is what one may perceive as “ranting”.
With all my trust in the greatness of the Irish people, this is my most humble plea asking you to recognize the historical relevance of this issue, to spread the truth about the Lisbon Treaty in every way you can - please send my plea to everyone you know in email chains.
Vote NO to the dictatorial takeover of Europe.
Vote NO to Lisbon Treaty.
Thank you with all my gratitude.
Howard
April 28, 2008 at 9:15 am
Kathy,
Since the date of publishing your article, the state of matters - which you have superbly summerised- has not changed.
With many thanks for your informative blog and for the chance to share our views with you, please let me add some more information to my former post:
I would like to make a correction on a link posted with my former post:
Bonde’s Briefing 19.12.07: “Born in sun and sin”
http://www.bonde.com/index.php/bonde_UK/article/bondes_briefing_191207
The author of the referred article is Jens-Peter Bonde, a Danish member of the European Parliament, who first revealed the fact that the Lisbon Treaty is a product of conspiracy among the political leaders of Europe. As a truly democratic and credible politician Bonde has resigned as a MEP and now he is the president of the Eudemocrats (or EUD) (http://www.eudemocrats.org/). EUD is a new organisation of outstanding and credible politicians with the mission to offer an alternative to the Lisbon Treaty, by drafting a new constitution with a truly democratic content and form, as well as by proposing reforms to achieve a democratic institutional mechanism of the EU.
In addition to the EUD’s website, I have recently discovered that the National Platform, represented by prominent academic and legal professionals, opened a new site providing all details - with actual quotes from the text - and all the legal implications of the Lisbon Treaty:
“Lisbon Treaty Irish Referendum Blog - National Platform”
http://nationalplatform.wordpress.com/
Please also visit our new site including a summary and all articles of the Lisbon Treaty research:
“The Lisbon Treaty Blog
Facts about the Lisbon Treaty - what political science tells us”
http://howardh.wordpress.com/about/
April 28, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Please let everyone to make his/her own opinion, all you did in your comment is, that you expressed your view of the thing. Because of it expresions like: Vote NO to the dictatorial takeover of Europe. Vote NO to Lisbon Treaty - are not on the right place. Im traveling across the world, wothout Lisabon treaty, European union will be not able to hold its today position for more than next 10 years. Is this what you want? Lisabon treaty is not the best possibility but is much better than doing nothing. Without Lisabon treaty, and other neccessary treties to come, Ireland and all member states will be in great energy crisis, also without possibility to influence world climate changes, trade, security…… Just my opinion. Just write + and -, not only -.
May 20, 2008 at 5:50 pm
Hi Kathy,
I stumbled upon your article searching the internet for some impartial, “plain english” Lisbon treaty info and I’ve got to say you took the words right out of my mouth.
I’m sitting here on my sofa a little annoyed because I just got home from work to find a leaflet had been stuffed my letterbox from euroinfo.ie. Finally, I thought, the EU are sending me something bright and colourful in laymans terms to help me decide. I was wrong. While the leaflet didn’t actually say the words “Vote No” everything between its covers screamed it. This kind of fly by night canvassing really grinds my gears, insults my intelligence and leaves the information gap created by a government who refuse to inform its citizens (perhaps purposely?) even more glaring. I think our government need to remember that not everyone waits on their doorstep for the Irish Times to land every morning, and sometimes the average person doesn’t get time to keep up to date with political affairs, or rummage on the internet comparing websites. We need to be informed and that is their duty.
Thank you for your article
June 9, 2008 at 9:27 am
I am a pro european. Yet I cannot comprehend what I am being asked to vote “yes” for.
This gives manyof us a dilemma in that we want to do the right thing.
I recommend that we give ourselves an option.If we dont know vote “no” and add “don’t understand” against the No.
Then ask the pollsters to count the “No - dont understand” vote and send the results to the commission in Brussels
Leave a Reply