[Comment] The European Parliament should steer clear of Irish politics
PETER SAIN LEY BERRY
14.11.2008 @ 09:27 CET
EUOBSERVER / COMMENT - In the five months since the Irish referendum on the Lisbon treaty in June there have been two developments: the Irish Taoiseach, Mr Brian Cowen, has become increasingly perplexed and the European elites - the European Parliament in particular - have become increasingly paranoid.
A majority of Irish citizens voted against the Lisbon Treaty in June. (Photo: EUobserver)
Mr Cowen, on whose broad shoulders the responsibility for delivering a "yes" vote squarely fell, was dismayed to have lost and since then has been pressured by his colleagues in the European Council to come up with some solution that will save his face and, by reversing the referendum result, save the Lisbon treaty as well.
He volunteered an interim report last October and more definite proposals are scheduled to be tabled next month. Nevertheless, the Irish government is still poring over the entrails of the plebiscite, mounting survey after survey to ascertain the real reasons why 53 per cent of the electorate voted against the treaty.
It has been pretty clear from the outset, however, (though for understandable reasons only those who care little for public opinion have actually said so) that the only way to reverse the result would be by holding another referendum. So, the questions that have to be asked are: when might this be held and what concessions might be made to make a positive result more probable?
Unfortunately, "probable" is about as far as we can go. For there remains the awful possibility that faced with the prospect of being made, yet again, to return to their dinners for the second time in eight years (they were also asked to re-vote on the Nice treaty in 2001), the Irish electorate may simply dig in their heels and resist whatever blandishments may be thrown their way.
Certainly that is the hope - is indeed the intention - of Mr Declan Ganley, the engaging Irishman whose Libertas Group led the No campaign and who is now fighting a rearguard defensive action under the slogan of "No means No!"
For in European polls it is not apparently enough to secure a convincing result - in this case by a margin greater than that with which Barack Obama recently beat John McCain - one has to ensure that the result is not overturned by some sleight of hand a short time later.
Mr Ganley is alive to this ruse and, full of fighting spirit, is already leading his troops towards the sound of gunfire. He recently registered Libertas as an Irish political party with the purpose of running a slate of candidates in next June's elections to the European Parliament.
As the most likely date for any Lisbon Treaty referendum re-run would be the autumn of 2009, Libertas would thus be able to use the Parliamentary election to reinforce its views among the electorate.
Mr Ganley has even made a gnomic announcement about "working to build a platform to give all EU citizens a chance to express their views ...at the ballot box in June." It is not entirely clear whether he is considering developing Libertas into some pan-European party umbrella, or whether he is talking about a species of pan-European referendum.
However democracy happens, it should be respected
All of which is deeply unwelcome to those who occupy high places in Brussels. The European Parliament in particular seems especially exercised. Indeed so unwelcome and so unpopular has Mr Ganley become that all sorts of allegations are being banded about concerning him, his business interests and the funding of Libertas by people who really should know better.
Taken together these allegations suggest that a majority of Irish voters were tricked out of their rightful senses last June by a campaign of emotion and disinformation financed by American interests (the CIA are mentioned, so deep runs this paranoia) pursuing the strategic goal of a Europe, weak and disunited. The CIA fixed the Irish referendum, or so some parts of the European Parliament appear to want us to believe.
Those who follow these columns will know that I am a supporter of the Lisbon Treaty. I urged the Irish to vote for it. But I am also a proponent of the principles of democracy, which, as it happens, I believe is best served by proper elections rather than referenda. But however democracy happens, I believe it should be respected. The European Union is sadly lacking in this arcane art and therefore I have some sympathy with Mr Ganley.
He has, of course, refuted all such allegations against him making, in addition, the not unreasonable point that, as the Irish referendum was an internal Irish affair conducted under Irish law, it is for the Irish authorities alone to make any such allegations. Libertas will publish all its accounts in full, as the law requires, at the end of the financial year, he insists.
It is true that Mr Ganley's companies have business dealings with American defence interests, but that is a very long way from making him a pawn of the CIA. Besides which it has been a continuing and unchanging plank of US foreign policy since the earliest days to see Europe strong and united. If the CIA were to be involved, therefore, surely they would have acted against Mr Ganley, rather than supporting him?
But in the desperate scramble to legitimise a re-run of the referendum any nonsense, it seems, will do. It would suit the powers that be no end to be able to pronounce the first referendum invalid of the basis of some species of foreign funding.
To this end a delegation from the European Parliament due to meet a party of American Congressmen next month to discuss key items on the transatlantic agenda, has been given the remit of raising the question of the funding of the Libertas campaign. Much to the astonishment of their American friends, who know the CIA rather better than the European Parliament does.
In an age when terrorists fly airliners into skyscrapers and Western values face multiple and ubiquitous threats, they incline to the opinion that the CIA has rather more important ways of spending its time and money than intervening in European politics.
The European Parliament needs to be careful in what it does. Democratic outcomes, should be respected, however inconvenient. It should stay out of Irish affairs and find other ways of resolving its anxiety than by looking for improbable scapegoats. But then some people were convinced that the British secret service murdered Diana, Princess of Wales.
The author is an independent commentator on European affairs