06.15.08
saying “no” to lisbon
Ever since Ireland voted “No” to the Lisbon Treaty late last week, there’s been all manner of pot-bashing and shouting from the Eurosceptic lobby here in the UK about the result. This, apparently, is proof that the British public (in common, presumably, with the public of every other nation in Europe, bar Ireland) are being hoodwinked and deprived of their rights by not being given a referendum on the treaty. The inference is that our politicians know that the public would defeat the treaty, so they’re passing it through the backdoor instead.
At this juncture, it’s worth saying a few basic things. Firstly, the Eurosceptics are right. Secondly, they’re right for the wrong reasons. Finally, the proponents of the European ideal have, on this occasion, debased themselves with a shoddy campaign and a shoddier piece of legislation which skirts dangerously close to justifying the xenophobic, insular viewpoints espoused by the Eurosceptic lobby.
Why are the Eurosceptics right? They’re right because, inevitably, this treaty would have been defeated if it had gone to a referendum in the UK. They’re also right because the Government quite clearly chose not to have a referendum purely because it knew that the treaty would have been defeated. On many other issues, Labour is desperately out of touch with its electorate - on this one, however, it’s perfectly in touch with them, and choosing to ignore and bypass them because of it.
So why are they right for the wrong reasons, then? All you need to do is look at how the “No” campaign in Ireland was conducted - and the manner in which it won the vote - to realise that there was never going to be a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, even if the government had called such a referendum. Of those who voted “No” to the treaty in Ireland, most were not voting on the content of the treaty - they were voting based on mis-information, manipulated fears and false beliefs.
A few issues dominated the No vote in Ireland, all pushed forward by relatively fringe political groups (the extremist Catholic movement, Sinn Fein and various others). Fearmongering from these groups convinced parts of the electorate that the Lisbon Treaty would introduce abortion to Ireland “through the back door”, along with legal prostitution and a relaxation of the drug laws. More insidiously, the Lisbon “No” campaign preyed on the ugly side of the Irish national character which has emerged in recent years - the extraordinary xenophobia and blatant racism which has confronted people from the new EU states who have moved to Ireland to work.
If you thought our right-wing press were doing a good job of treating Polish immigrants like shit in the UK, you’ve seen nothing yet. Ireland, lacking the UK’s background of immigration (although that’s no excuse for a country which was itself one of the world’s most prolific sources of immigrant labour for centuries), has reacted ferociously and disgustingly to the people who have entered the country to work. Much of the Irish “No” vote was a vote against immigration and against “foreigners” - the fury of small-minded people being cleverly directed by political campaigners morally corrupt enough to turn racism to their own ends.
In fact, I’ve only heard one honest, genuine and informed reason for voting “No” in the referendum thus far - from voters who simply did not understand the treaty, having made the effort to do so, and chose to vote No rather than accept a constitution-altering document whose small print they could not fathom. I’ll come back to this in a second.
Under these circumstances, can you see what would happen if the UK had a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty? There’s no way in hell we’d actually get a vote - or even a debate - on the merits of the treaty. Instead, we’d have months of scaremongering, with the usual suspects sprinkling fear, uncertainty and doubt into the minds of voters not over the treaty, but over Europe itself. The Sun, the News of the World, the Daily Mail and the Express would have a field day, stirring up every bit of xenophobic, anti-Europe sentiment they could muster, repeating tired lies over European legislation (they still haven’t got over the “bendy bananas” and “metric martyr” stories, both of which have been conclusively debunked) and muttering darkly about foreign influence taking our sovereignty away. The delicious irony, of course, is the arguably the most powerful man in UK politics is, er, Rupert Murdoch - a foreign national who wields his power, and disseminates his dislike of the EU, in this country through his tools of foreign intervention, the Sun, the NOTW and Sky News…
A referendum on the Lisbon Treaty in the UK would be defeated, not because of any problem with the treaty, but because of the emotive, manipulative and dishonest campaign which would be waged by the Eurosceptic lobby. That’s why we’re not getting a referendum, frankly - and it’s a terrible shame and a massive democratic failure, because frankly, there are tons of problems in the treaty which should be aired, which should be the topic of a national debate and which should, ultimately, be put to a vote.
This is where Europe is failing its citizens. Even as a huge believer in the ideal of an open, co-operating and unified Europe, I have misgivings about the Lisbon Treaty - but more than that, I am appalled by the manner in which the treaty has been created, presented and pushed through ratification.
The reason why debate in Ireland was dominated by scaremongering, and part of the reason why the same thing would happen in the UK, is because the Yes campaign simply didn’t have any ammunition to throw back. The treaty, as a piece of legislation, is utter rubbish. It is vastly over-complicated and completely unreadable to anyone who wasn’t directly involved in the negotiation of the document. It is an appallingly bad piece of law, a testament to the horrific belief that all law must be obfuscated by unnecessary verbiage and constant references to external sources and documents.
In other words, there’s nothing there for people to relate to - nothing that governments can point at and say “look, read it for yourself - this is the structure of the new Europe we’re proposing”. Instead, we’re asked to take lawyers, politicians and civil servants at their word when they tell us that some very clever people have drafted this document, and here’s what it does, and to ignore all the people who say it’ll do anything else…
Law doesn’t have to be this way. Look at the constitution of the United States of America - or better again, and closer to home, look at the constitution of the Republic of Ireland. These are simple, plain-English documents which define and rule over every piece of law ever passed in those nations, but they’re so simple that they can be taught to primary school children. In Ireland, in fact, the constitution IS taught to primary school children - I recall it bring printed on the inside cover of one of our textbooks, and having to learn passages from it for homework.
What the EU has done here is to take a fundamental document defining the future of Europe, obfuscate it so that nobody can read it, then shove it through national parliaments without public consent. This is shoddy, non-democratic and frankly insulting to the electorates whom these people serve. Here in Britain, it’s typical of our present batch of politicians, who seem to think that fearmongering or simply doing things behind people’s backs are a better way to proceed than standing up for the principles of the actions they’re taking. Take the Human Rights Act - a piece of legislation which is a fundamental protection of our freedoms and rights, but which our politicians seem happy to watch being eviscerated by the howling right-wing press, too afraid, apparently, to take a stand in the defence of such an important piece of law.
I believe in Europe - and as such, I don’t want to see Europe progress through hidden channels, back-room deals and treaties signed into law by politicians without consulting their people. I want a vigorous debate on Europe, a chance for the Eurosceptic lobby to be shown up for the frauds, xenophobes and liars they really are, and for the principles of European co-operation and the value it has brought to the lives of British people to be brought into the light for all to see.
That’s not what we’re getting, and it disgusts me - and for that reason, as painful as it may be to stand on the same side of the fence as the Eurosceptics, I sincerely hope that the Irish “No” vote sends this whole sorry shambles back to the drawing board.
Technorati Tags: Daily Mail, EU, Europe, Eurosceptics, Lisbon Treaty, politics, The Sun, racism, referendum, Rupert Murdoch






John O'Kane said,
June 18, 2008 at 9:14 pm
I don’t think the no vote was about xenophobia or racism, certainly not a majority of votes. You are looking at a country that has 300,000 new immigrants in a very short amount of time and the vast majority of people are fine with that. Yes, I’ve heard some poor rumblings at times, but overall things are fine. As it stands between open borders and jobs for anyone in the EU, and open fishing rights for the French and Spanish, Europe has had more than net gain from Ireland’s participation in the EU. Most people ignore the Fishermen, Farmers and Taxi drivers when it comes to the xenophobia.
A lot of the no vote came from a petulant rebuke to both the government, which could only shake a finger at people, European politicians showing the stick and a strong belief that a better agreement could be created on various hard to understand issues about how power would be shared and changes of rights. That most of the real issues were actually non-issues was not strongly contested enough by the Yes camp because even they were having trouble understanding the treaty. It was a bitch to sell - so people played safe and voted no - let the politicians get something better or clearer, sure didn’t we vote again for Nice.
For what it’s worth I voted Yes, but I am very interested in seeing how this is all handled. It’s a real test for people looking to further their agenda’s via Europe but being held back by the silly democratic tendencies of a small Island nation.
John O'Kane said,
June 18, 2008 at 11:16 pm
And more importantly, whats up with your site - google has it marked as malware and eset security thinks your wp-stats include is a trojan.
Rob Fahey said,
June 26, 2008 at 11:13 pm
No idea what was up with the site - I’ve got Google to check it over again and it all seems clear now. There might have been a problem before I upgraded Wordpress to the latest version…
I don’t know whether it was a majority of votes, but I certainly got a strong impression from many Irish people that they were voting not against Lisbon, but as a general protest against the level of immigration to Ireland. Perhaps in some parts of the country, things have gone better - but certainly in the West and in the border counties, and indeed in parts of Dublin, I’ve seen first-hand serious racial tensions that go beyond anything I’ve seen in Britain.
I agree, though, that most of the No vote was a rebuke to the Government and to Brussels - and on that point, I think it was richly deserved. If a document is on the one hand presented as essential, and on the other hand, utterly incomprehensible - then there’s no sensible thing to do other than to reject it and demand something clearer and more defined.
And yes, how the EU handles this No vote is going to be absolutely crucial to the perception of the union by its people. If Ireland is strong-armed into ratifying the treaty in some manner, I suspect the EU may find the rug swept from under its feet in public support terms.