Brussels, 24/06/2008 (Agence Europe) - The follow-up to the Irish referendum was the focus of MEPs' speeches at their meeting on Tuesday 24 June 2008 to discuss the outcome of the recent European Council (see EUROPE 9687). Many saw the Irish no vote as revealing a profound malaise across all EU countries, arising from citizens' lack of trust in institutions across the board and the answers the EU is likely to provide to their problems. In order to bring the EU closer to its citizens, some want more communication and others more emphasis on social affairs. What is at stake is ensuring the EU's credibility into the longer term, beyond the October 2008 deadline that the EU heads of state decided upon for coming up with answers to the Lisbon Treaty question.
During a stock-take on the Slovenian Presidency's six months at the helm of the Council of the EU, the Slovenian prime minister welcomed progress that had made the EU more efficient and better placed to react to challenges on the global stage. The most recent progress, at the 19-20 June 2008 European Council, demonstrated that Europe was dynamic and worked well, said Janez Janša, who stressed the need to respect the Irish referendum vote. He called for the ratification process to continue. This is the only productive, logical conclusion, he said, hoping that the fundamentals of the Lisbon Treaty would not be challenged. The European Council had decided, he said, to take the time needed for positive decisions, expected before the upcoming summit in October 2008. Stressing the need to change the way people in Europe think about the EU institutions, he said that communication was key. The EU must not be derailed, said José Manuel Barroso, who also welcomed the “genuine consensus” reached on the Lisbon Treaty by the European Council.
It is normal practice to respect the vote of the Irish but people should not think that the Irish will automatically rally to us in a second vote, warned Hartmut Nassauer, (EPP-ED, Germany) adding that everything had to be done to save the treaty. The reasons for the no vote are varied but above all there is weariness and the no vote is valid for the EU, said Nassauer. He added that it was not just Charlie McCreevy who hadn't read the treaty. The idea citizens have about the EU is given by the European Commission. People are getting ever more tired of Brussels, said Nassauer, calling for a genuine culture of solidarity and better respect of subsidiarity.
We can't say the European Commission is responsible - it would be over-simplistic to criticise a single institution, answered Martin Schulz, but he reproached the Commission for its failings when it comes to social issues. Europe no longer lacks a single market, or greater freedom for enterprise, what is lacking in Europe is a social counterweight and that is what citizens feel, warned Schulz, who is president of the PES Group at the EP. People are constantly talking about social measures at the Commission but then they do not act socially and that is why citizens are scared of this EU, he said. Schulz added that every citizen should feel that the EU is looking after him or her, and in this sense, the recent summit was not a success.
Like most of his colleagues, Graham Watson welcomed the outcome of the Slovenian Presidency in many areas. Watson, who is President of the ALDE Group, said some people thought that the Slovenian Presidency was simply a warm-up period before the French Presidency but he knew that progress had been made. Watson said he knew that the Irish were not disillusioned with their own government but with the European institutions, but added that there was also a gap between citizens and governments. He hoped that the debate at the most recent Council had served to put citizens' concerns at the heart of EU debate and had shown that the EU was there to serve citizens rather than dominate them.
Despite the Slovenian Presidency making progress, it had not managed to assert itself against the heavyweights (particularly in areas like immigration), regretted Monica Frassoni, co-president of the Greens-EFA. Over the past six months, she said, the big debates had covered important issues but nothing 'really vital' and the energy and climate change package and the attitude to be taken to China, etc, would be covered by the French Presidency. The problem with bringing Europe closer to the citizens was not communication, she argued, slamming the balance of power between countries, that marginalised small countries and the EU institutions. The EP is facing blackmail over the Waste Directive and the Returns Directive and the Commission is ever more at the mercy of pressure groups, she explained. Along with Ireland, everyone should reflect on the fact that a Europe of common institutions that are weak and subject to business and national lobbies can only become more distant from the citizens.
Without blaming the Slovenian Presidency, regrettable recent decisions have also stuck in people's minds, opined Francis Wurtz. The Working Time Directive was a blow to social Europe and the Returns Directive was an attack on human dignity. The launch of negotiations with Israel to strengthen ties with the EU impacted on the EU's credibility in the Middle East and the Mediterranean, said the GUE-NGL president. It was also unfortunate that the European Council had decided it needed more time to understand the disillusion of citizens and had postponed for four months the examination of possible measures to cope with rising oil prices. If I understood the president of the Council properly, “communication” will do the rest and convince people that “everything's OK”. “Good luck”, fumed Wurtz.
A footnote in the European Council conclusion document, inserted upon request from the Czech Republic, left people perplexed. It notes that the Czech Republic cannot ratify the Lisbon Treaty until the Czech constitutional court has decided whether the treaty conforms to the Czech legal system. What is the point?, asked Spanish Socialist MEP Enrique Barón Crespo, adding that he didn't want to be held hostage by the footnote. Hoping it was not a stalling tactic, German Social Democrat MEP Jo Leinen agreed that the clause was not a good idea because other countries also had constitutional appeals (Germany and the United Kingdom).
British Conservative MEP Roger Helmer said the heads of states' attitude showed their disgust at the Irish referendum outcome. The same criticism was made by Conservative British MEP Phillip Bushill-Matthews, regretting the European Council's doublespeak. He explained that the summit said it had taken note of the Irish vote but immediately added that it would ignore the result! He added that the Irish should be listened to and the ratification process should be stopped.
No need to go that far, said Irish Fine Gael MEP Avril Doyle, who said the vote did not reduce the legitimacy of the right to ratify. Elmar Brok (EPP-ED, Germany) also felt that representative democracy was just as legitimate as a referendum. He said that if this principle were abandoned, then democracy would be lost and we would be in a situation of manipulation. He slammed the lies of the supporters of a no vote in Ireland. Intensely critical of the arguments put forward during the campaign, Irish MEP Gay Mitchell said it would be possible to mobilise the population by talking to them about the vision held by MEPs. Fellow Irish MEP Avril Doyle regretted that people had talked about all the benefits of being part of the EU but only in financial terms rather than talking about the fundamentals underlying the EU that had brought peace to the continent. (A.B.)