Don't count on me lumping Netherlands in with Eurosceptic countries. Yes, I know, the Dutch people rejected the Constitutional Treaty in a referendum and logically, the national parliament and government are taking this into account. A few days ago, the government sent parliamentarians a letter explaining its position on negotiations for a new European treaty. It indicated that the starting point for the Netherlands had to be the Treaty of Nice (EUROPE 9396). This is understandable. How can a democratic government assert that the rejected treaty constitutes the basis of what reforms are to be negotiated? The tone and the contents of this letter, however, comfort me in my refusal to put on the same level the cold front in the Netherlands (people, parliament and government) with regard to European construction and the Euroscepticism persisting in the United Kingdom or being affirmed (temporarily, I hope) elsewhere to the highest levels in Poland and the Czech Republic.
The Netherlands is one of the pillars of the Benelux, which is the heart of Europe and which continues to provide the European cause with its tribunes, such as Jean-Claude Juncker and Guy Verhofstadt. We only have to wait for the Dutch now. The government position is now much more positive than what we could have been led to understand from a superficial look at the “letter” in question. The Hague government believes that revision of the texts in force is “indispensable” because “the Treaty of Nice does not constitute a sufficient basis for ensuring that the Union works efficiently and democratically”. The government points out that certain ideas are progressing, such as subsidiarity and reinforcement of democratic control, and in this connection “some elements in the Constitutional Treaty could be taken up” as “parts of this treaty go in the direction of strengthening the EU's democracy and dynamism as sought by the Netherlands”. It is true that the new treaty should not have a constitutional nature: the EU not becoming a super-state should be clarified. The term “constitution” should therefore be renounced, as well as “certain symbolic and conceptual elements”, which gave the impression of taking a step in the direction of a European state that was above the national state.
Support for strengthened EU. What was rejected in the treaty, but which improves how the EU works at a democratic level, has to be safeguarded, and the Dutch government cites: the citizen's initiative, reinforcement of national parliaments, transparency and simplification of legislative procedures. The Netherlands supports a strengthening of the provisions planned for the current draft in these areas, notably the role of national parliaments in controlling the subsidiarity principle, although it is acknowledged that this should not result in “any right of the individual veto for national parliaments”. Nonetheless, by recognising the “appreciable results” that the EU has obtained in the social arena, the Netherlands considers that every country should remain responsible for preserving, consolidating and renewing social progress, and that European legislation should not in any way harm the quality of public services.
At the same time, the Dutch government supports greater cooperation in policies related to energy policy, climate change, asylum and immigration, economic competitiveness, terrorism, cross-border crime, “as well as external policy”. “It is important to improve the decision-making capacity of the EU” in all these areas. The new treaty should contain “rules and criteria” to be strictly applied to future enlargement. On these bases, the Netherlands is “adopting a constructive attitude” on negotiations for a new treaty and it is “prepared to participate in its elaboration in the given calendar”. It believes that 2009 is a good deadline because of the election of the new parliament (June) and the setting up of the new Commission (November).
Repercussions and internal shocks. We would like most member states preparing for the launch of the new intergovernmental conference (IGC) and the definition of its mandate to show willing too. It think that the cold front which affected the confidence of the Netherlands in the European enterprise was mainly provoked by internal shocks (such as the cutting of the throat of a film director in broad daylight because of his opinions, by a Muslim who already had Dutch nationality) that shook up the traditional open attitude to all ideas and beliefs and which created a fear of seeing their national identity compromised. The reaction did contain a certain inwardness about it and restrictions on immigration and access to nationality were effectively taken. I am, however, convinced that support for European construction persists and that it will be expressed when the time comes.
(F.R.)