Is it a crisis? or not? was it the Looney left/right, or both? or is it all just a storm in a tea cup? Old splits between Stalinist and Socialist, new ones between the Far Right and the Center. Is the soft center of liberalism melting into a vacuum again? Should I be arsed? Whichever way you gaze at the problem, a prism of complexity emerges.
If I had to bet on it, I would say that in the best case scenario, we can expect to be part of a two tier Europe operating on Nice rules while the rest gallop off into the distance. This would be sad and totally against the spirit of the EU, but could yet happen if events elsewhere follow a certain course.
Lisbon may not be immediately regarded as ruptuous in Irish terms, but could be the start of a unified Eurosceptic movement to dismantle bureaucracy from the top down. An opportunity which the far right would dearly hope for in order to achieve their fractured aims. The disregard by the commission as to how the discourse is being formed in smaller less powerful member states, has allowed space for a grand coalition of irreconcilable minorities to temporarily forge an effective spanner to chuck.
The problem persists in modern representative government, of reducing the democratic deficit created by too much indulgence in so called 'good governance'. Partly intentionally and partly driven by the fact that mainstream media today exists to sell audiences to advertisers. The 'brand' is always 'crisis' and the solution called for is always severe. RTE's defense on this was skillful but utterly unconvincing. Thus, 'good governance' has now become the setting up a safe moat between government and the hungry media by way of spin and quangos.
On this occasion they inadvertently bored to death a busy demographic, who had little attention to give to politics in the first case, fresh with thoughts of Bertie and his cash, with only the memory of the debacle of Nice 1 and 2 to frame their view of the EU. Faced with another massive legal document to approve, their only choice was 'no'. The multi-party message could not make up the numbers. The rest occupied the same marginal position in the discourse as they always do.
From the point of view of the Commission right now, it is much harder to talk of a general Euroscepticism, than it is to blame the result on an bunch of noisy yokels in the corner, especially when you are seeking to move things on. Using the '1m voters deciding for 495 million others argument', does not work, because it 'reifies' direct democracy, and leads us to questions of substance which the greatest minds of humanity have failed to answer.
The big winners (to my mind without knowing too much about it) were the Trojan horse of Libertas, who can now expand on their mission to see if they can unite their brand of Hiberno-scepticism with the Tory and UKIP versions. Moves that have given us the reassuring sight of a bunch of British 'Hooray Henrys' in a parliament which is prepared to allow even those who would wish it’s end to participate. What Europe should be working on right now is what to do after both Lisbon and the ‘two-tier’ options have run their course, while taking seriously the problem of Euroscepticism in member states.
Back home there could be some ways found to deal with European issues in Dáil Éireann. A joint Committee on Euro affairs may not be enough as it stands. A European politics show that goes out once every three months at 4 in the morning in a leap year is surely not. It's the simplest things like constituency boundaries and voter registration problems that cause a lot of needless hot air at election time and put people off going to the polling booth. It is also about time, that transparency and the question of party funding and the role of special interest groups was addressed and that media capital was retaken from endless muck about headscarves, peados, road safety and Michael O’Leary’s PR entourage.
The final outcome, based on how successfully things can change, is answering the question as to why exactly a legislative decision on administrational aspects of European law can't actually be left to the Dáil?, and why we are plagued by ridiculous referendums and worse debates?
Monday, 23 June 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Governing 500m+ people by parliamentary assent to the demands of offshore plutocrats and autocrats is a recipe for disaster in the future. It perfectly mirrors Europe's failed imperial governance in the past. It would feed and foment the worst forms of nationalism.
It is a grave mistake to think that there is no ideological agenda being facilitated by the Treaty. Or that there is not a huge interpretative vacuum at its core which will be resolved only by cases taken to the European Court of Justice. Only then would we truly know what we have signed up to.
It is too far removed from our influence as individual citizens. Even were we to act collectively we can not compete with the well-established lobby groups in Brussels.
Don't despair. Vote YES or NO to Free Europe Constitution at www.FreeEurope.info !
Offshore plutocrats and autocrats, like who?
What would feed and ferment the worst forms of Nationalism is if every country can do what they want, sign pacts with who they want, and have all competing against each other.
Are you a PD? Everything is an Ideological agenda, even yours.
Is it not useful that we have the ECJ in the first place?
As Colm Tobin said:
"I support the European project as a way of protecting me from Irish politicians. I voted for Lisbon, not because I wanted to follow the Irish political establishment but because I despise it and need protection from it."
I feel exactly the same.
Lobby Groups are a fact of life, if you want a liberal democracy that is.
ANON:
Thanks for the shite link to the "Anti-Green" Mr. Klaus, is that you Patricia???
We have ALL THAT ALREADY,
as for taxation, that is an ongoing issue.
I'm all lisboned out. I voted no. Because I could. Because of the fuckers, they wouldn't explain it to me.
More importantly (and as I mentioned on Gimme), its kissy lips and fancy trainers for the cup. Which cup? Dana's cup.
This surely is the issue which grips Euro central, kissy lips or schnitzel.
The 'No' was a success. At the end of the day, guarantees were given on everything: tax, neutrality, everything, but nobody believed it.
There's not much more you can do apart from guarantee it over and over again. That was the 'No' success, they got there early with a load of crazy scaremongering, and the damn thing lends itself to that too.
I'm like Conan, I would have been much happier with the Constitutional Treaty. But that would have been even harder to sell.
Post a Comment