|
As
the hyperbole, humbug and hysteria surrounding the
Nice Treaty referendum re-run starts to reach fever
pitch, there is still time to take a cold clear look
at the various issues and slice through the fog of
disinformation - especially that peddled by the Yes
side - to try and establish the truth.
1. Why are we having this referendum at all?
We
already voted No. But now we have to vote again on
exactly the same Treaty. Why? Is this the quality
of European democracy? We will be allowed to vote
as often as we wish until we give the right answer?
And funny how the other member states, great “democracies”
one and all, have point-blank refused to ratify Nice
by referendums in their own countries. They know well
that the people of every other current member State
would reject Nice if given the chance. Irish-style
popular democracy, it turns out, is just too damn
inconvenient for these virtuous “democrats”.
2. A No Vote will lead to economic devastation
And
how exactly? The EU has no powers whatsoever to “punish”
us economically for voting No. That particular red
herring aside, the Yes side claim that multinationals
will abandon Ireland in the event of a No vote. But
why should they? Multinationals are here because they
make profits - and very healthy ones at that; for
the educated, English-speaking workforce; and for
access to European markets. In a No vote every single
one of those factors will remain in place. Nice has
no ramifications for the European Single Market whatsoever.
This whole issue is a mere scare mongering campaign
with no basis in legal or economic reality. Do we
really want to become “inextricably linked”
to an organisation that tries to intimidate and bully
its smaller weaker members in this way?
3.
Nice is essential for enlargement
What
can I say? Just about everybody of note in the European
establishment right up to Romano Prodi has admitted
this is not in fact the case. In fact the “doomsday
scenario” in terms of enlargement proceeding,
the worst case possible, is that enlargement will
be delayed “by one or two years” (Peter
Sutherland). So the Czechs and the Poles might be
joining in 2006 instead of 2004. Of course, had the
first democratic vote been respected, it could all
be sorted out by now for enlargement to proceed as
originally scheduled…next time, how about involving
the 10 new countries in the negotiations to shape
the Europe they want to be part of? Oh, sorry, that
would be equitable and democratic, and we can’t
have that in the Brave New Europe…
4.
We have a moral obligation to Eastern Europe
Indeed
we do, but not the obligation the Yes side are peddling.
We have an obligation to these nations, newly emerged
from under the Soviet jackboot, to safeguard their
national sovereignties and ensure they get the best
possible circumstances in which to prosper - both
economically and in terms of their development into
flourishing democratic states. The badly skewed terms
of the Nice treaty will do neither. Why swap political
and economic domination by Moscow for the “kinder,
gentler” Imperialism of Brussels? Voting No means
that the current legal basis of the Union stands -
in other words these nations will join as legally
equal Nation States, not second-class sub-provinces
of Greater Europe.
5.
Europe Prevents War
So?
What has that got to do with Nice? And to be brutally
blunt, if the other European States feel they need
the EU to force them to play nice and not invade one
another every generation, that says a lot more about
them than it does about us. Next time some Europhile
raises this, just point out that Ireland is one of
the only European countries that never voted for extremist
Fascist or Communist parties, had a Fascist or Communist
Government, invaded anyone, persecuted minorities
or built death camps. It is most definitely not the
Republic of Ireland that needs a lecture on keeping
the peace…
6.
Nice does not impinge on neutrality
Hmmm.
Then why spend €230 million on preparing the
Irish Defence Forces to take part in the Rapid Reaction
Force? Does Ahern’s promise of not joining a
European military alliance carry the same weight as
his promise not to join NATO’s PfP without a
referendum? What of all the tonnage of documentation
and strategic policy statements emanating from Brussels
on the need for Europe to start matching the US in
terms of ability to throw its weight around? Should
anyone in Ireland take the word of a gallery of ex-Empires
that they do not envy American military power - or
that they don’t want to catch up? Yes, and I
have a nice bridge I’d like to sell you. Then
again, maybe you believe the world actually needs
yet another 800-pound gorilla with nukes.
Ireland
has the proudest record of UN peacekeeping service
in the world. No other nation - not one - contributes
as much in relation to their size as the Republic.
Our service to the world is recognised and appreciated
everywhere, and especially in the poor, disadvantaged
and conflict-ridden nations of the globe. Ask yourself
this - would you rather Ireland was respected by the
downtrodden and afflicted for our principled military
service; or seen as a good lapdog by the nuclear armed
and militaristic powers of Europe?
7.
Nice does not create a two-tier Europe
From
the earliest days of the Treaty of Rome, the various
members of the ECSC/EEC/EC/EU (or whatever yer having
yerself this week) have enjoyed strict legal equality.
The European project (so far) has always been about
partnership - all of us together working for our mutual
benefit. The only reason we are having a (second!)
referendum on Nice in the first place is because,
in the judgement of then Attorney General Michael
McDowell, Nice fundamentally altered the partnership
basis of the EU with the cynically named “Enhanced
Co-operation” provisions and the extensions to
Qualified Majority Voting. It is not exactly a secret
that an inner core have their Enhanced Cooperation
plans drawn up, and that item #1 is tax harmonisation.
Now, just why do a group of equal sovereign States
in an economic and trade customs union - if that is
all Europe is intended to be - need to harmonise their
taxes? The US is a group of States in a political,
economic and monetary union, but there is no requirement
for Massachusetts to have the same taxes as Kentucky…
Enhanced
Co-operation creates “inner sanctums” with
the political clout, and using the institutions of
the EU, to drive the agenda. Ireland will be faced
with the stark choice to go along with whatever the
inner core want regardless of the cost to ourselves,
or stay outside the inner core and be ignored and
slighted by the rest of the inner sanctum club. Some
choice.
The
current Government insists “tax harmonisation
is not and will never be on our agenda”. The
same Government that said they’d have a referendum
before joining PfP, or that spending cuts (or “adjustments”
if you prefer Bertie-speak) would not be necessary
after the election, or any of a string of other meaningless
“promises”. And of course, it says absolutely
nothing about the next Government’s position…
8. Nice does not transfer power to the larger states
As
the following table clearly demonstrates, this claim
by the Yes camp is a blatant, shameless, bald-faced
lie.
Each
of the Big Five (UK, Germany, France, Italy, Spain)
increases their share of the total vote. Every smaller
country suffers a decrease in their share of the vote.
Together, the Five have 143 votes out of the necessary
169 for a QMV decision. Only three of the other 10
small States, with votes adding up to 26, will be
required to railroad through QMV decisions to the
detriment of European democracy and the sovereignty
of small States. On the other hand, if every small
country voted together they would only have 94 votes
and would still need 3 of the Big Five to get a decision
passed.
9.
There are no plans for a European Superstate
First
of all it was a mere trade agreement to bring down
tariffs between members. Then an agricultural support
programme. Then we moved on to Brussels setting economic,
social and commercial regulations across all walks
of life. Then it became a mechanism for “economic
cohesion” - redistribution of wealth from rich
to poor within the EEC, out of which admittedly Ireland
did very well.
Now,
on these last two points the Government, Fine Gael
and Labour pontificate that Europe has been “good
to us” because it helped get our economy of its
knees in the late 80s; and has imposed a wide range
of health & safety and workers rights. Therefore,
goes the “logic”, we “owe it to Europe
to vote Yes”.
The
astounding arrogance of such blether from this shower
beggars belief. Let us remind ourselves - who was
it that destroyed the Irish economy in the first place?
Surely not Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and Labour
in the 70’s and early 80’s (when, lest we
forget, we were already in Europe. Europe wasn’t
much use in the long dark emigration years of the
80’s, was it?). And just why should we tug our
forelocks to Europe for imposing rights legislation
when what we should be feeling is outrage at the Irish
Governments who failed to provide those rights? And
who made up the Governments of old that failed the
Irish people - economically and socially - and had
to have others force them to give some basic dignity
to the people and workers of Ireland? Why, Fianna
Fáil, Fine Gael and Labour!
But
after all of that, Brussels wasn’t happy. Then
we had to have control over fiscal policy removed
via the Stability Pact; a common currency - the dear
old Euro that has caused such a hike in prices; monetary
policy removed to the unaccountable ECB; a nuclear
armed Rapid Reaction Force; a Common Foreign and Security
Policy (all agreed in Maastricht and Amsterdam)….now
it’s Enhanced Cooperation, QMV, dilution of the
voice of small States - all in Nice - and a European
Constitution planned for 2004.
Where
is all this heading? Where is the logical end of the
road to this creeping integration? Will anyone on
the Yes side tell you? Well, what do you call a political
set-up with a Constitution, an Army, a single currency,
a defence & foreign policy, a Parliament, an Executive
(the Commission), various courts, control over monetary
policy, control over fiscal policy, legislative powers
in social, economic and commercial matters - all of
which override national legislation? I don’t
know about you, but to me if it walks like a duck….
The
issue is not whether we are heading, at some unspecified
vague time in the future, towards a European Superstate.
The issue is why no-one on the Yes side will admit
that, after Nice and the 2004 Convention, that State
will already exist.
Add
it all up. Consider the known character and track
record of those urging you to vote Yes. Make no mistake
- this is our final opportunity. After Nice we will
never get another opportunity to influence the development
of the “European Project”. Irish independence
and neutrality will be gone forever. Look at the big
picture in all its disturbing, anti-democratic glory.
And
Just Say No.
Index: Current Articles + Latest News and Views + Book Reviews +
Letters + Archives
|
