Key words: "institutional order". I have made a number of constructive contributions on my blog, in terms of free speech, abiding by referendum Nos and arguing that secret discussions (particularly the invisible hand of Coreper) on the construction of public office should be a matter of public record.
More transparency is clearly needed so these are some good Ideas. But let me just not that the Irish voted for Ireland, not for the rest of the Union.
But one step further: the EU is primarily inter-governmental and as much about unelected national civil servants as our dearly beloved elected leaders.
I think most people on this blog agree that this is amjor problem and we should have more of a Union build on Supranational Institutions (like the parliament). But look at the Referendum in Ireland, despite the fat that the country is mostly pro-EU, a major point of concern was the loss of veto rights in the Council.
This means that there is a great unease about giving power to supranational institutions.
Someone might call that troll-baiting. When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
I think the causes of the Irish No were more structural in character.
One of the most telling incidents in the Irish referendum was McCreevy's "no sane person" would read this, underlining a popular sense of the Treaty as someone else's (the elite's?) document. This reaction seems to be shown in the Eurobaromter poll.
Giscard, who is often right about a lot of things, picked this up as a problem years ago which is why he spent so much time drafting the Convention text (I think he even had the French checked at the Academy) before Piris and others got their hands on it.
The demographics of the No vote also seem to show that young working class people and women, who do not vote in general elections, used the Irish referendum to score a hit on the political establishment. The establishment that to a man or woman urged a Yes.
I guess that is the issue: political establishments in many, or most, European countries are increasingly unable to mobilise or to take voters with them.
This seems to be a genuine European trend. That's why I likened it at the time to a James Larkin moment, after the rousing words by Camille Desmoulins on his monument in Dublin.
I know some Eurosceptics on the right who are secretly horrified by this development which I think is more profound than numbers of commissioners, Nice vote weighting etc.
Personally, I find it very heartening, could it be a pre-political-party stage of the beginning of the beginning of a new oppositional politics?
It is interesting that while turnout in standard elections is dropping (a probable sign of disenchantment with established politics) the referendum turnout grew (in Ireland, the Netherlands and France).
Could it be that as Europeans we have mistrust of our national governing classes, and their expression in the EU, in common? Could engaging with this be a potential representative European politics?
The question for both inter-governmentalists and supra-nationalists is, in this context, the same as for national political elites, that of accountability and representation.
I as posted a bit earlier I would very happily support the creation of European federal institutions based on democratic movements.
No, not trolling - what I meant was that borderline ad-hominem reactions to a new poster are inappropriate, and if you were a troll we might have a flame war going on, which is thankfully not the case.
To a large extent the French and Dutch no votes were also a hit on the political establishment. It has been pointed out that some of the no voters may have (correctly) interpreted that there was no downside to voting no: the EU has been operating under the current (Nice) treaty for about 6 years, with 25 members for 4 years and with 27 members for two years and the sky didn't fall.
It is also interesting to note that the one large country which approved the "constitution" in a referendum, Spain, saw turnout under 50% for the first time since Franco died, while turnout in the last two general elections was relatively high.
But in the case of Spain, while there was as much reason to be annoyed at the way the Establishment carried the referendum campaign, we have the hungup of wanting to bee good Europeans and so the referendum passed with over 70% for. When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
I hope I am not trolling.
You are certainly not trolling. In speaking to rz of "troll-baiting", Migeru meant provoking or attempting to provoke trollish behaviour - not that your behaviour was trollish.
As I said to you, you are welcome here.
Not that McCreevy is "a sane person" in my opinion...
You make someone like him your Commissioner at your peril.
Though, reportedly, Cowen hadn't read the treaty either. Probably a side effect of the deliberate delay to publish a consolidated version of the Lisbon Treaty, so as to prevent any sane person actually reading it. The consolidated version won't win any prizes for literary merit, but it can be read. When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
