Lisbon in a nutshell

If Ireland should reject the Lisbon Treaty again, the Commissars will punish us by withholding all the cash they weren’t going to give us anyway if we had voted Yes.

Lisbon take two

Isn’t democracy beautiful?

Isn’t it wonderful when the people at large have the chance to determine their own future instead of having a cadre of politicians, businessmen and vested interests deciding it for them?

On 12 June last, the Irish electorate voted against the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon. One would think that an institution such as the European Union, committed as it is to promoting the spread of western-style democracy throughout the globe, ought to respect that result. Was it not delivered by the democratic means so dear to the hearts of our European rulers, heirs as they are to the Revolutionaries of 1789, with their ideals of Liberté, Fraternité and Egalité?

Now it has been revealed that Taoiseach Brian Cowen is to offer the referendum on the Lisbon Treaty to the Irish electorate a second time, in exactly the same fashion as was done in 2002 with the Treaty of Nice.

What part of “No” do they not understand?

Melancholicus predicted as much last May, and he does not rejoice in the discovery that his prediction has been fulfilled.

What is the response of our European “brothers” to this travesty of the democratic process? Are concerned voices being raised in Brussels, opposing the Irish government’s decision to hold a second referendum since the voice of the Irish people has already been heard?

On the contrary, the EU commissars will offer the Irish government every assistance, every inducement, every warning and every threat in order to assure the correct result is obtained in the second Lisbon referendum, and that because the only thing that really matters is ratification, and the furtherance of the objectives of the Grand European Project. Democracy is allowed to be democracy only when the electorate deliver the desired outcome. That’s not really enfranchisement, is it?

So why not drop the pretence and just admit that the EU has designs on fashioning itself, by whatever means necessary, into a totalitarian state, whose executive, legislative and judicial powers shall in every conceivable instance trump those of its constituent nations provinces?

This scandalous repeat of the Lisbon referendum shall be held in October 2009, on a date yet to be appointed. Due to his forthcoming marriage, Melancholicus will by then be living in the People’s Republic of Obamaland, but he will make every arrangement necessary for being able to cast his vote in the re-run. He shall vote the same way he voted last June, for his mind has not changed in the interim. The result is a foregone conclusion in any case. Referenda shall continue to be put to the people until the people finally say what their betters want them to say. The final outcome is merely postponed, not averted. The game is rigged against us; we have to win every throw. The other side has to win but once.

This story courtesy of RTÉ:

Second Lisbon poll likely before October

Thursday, 11 December 2008 09:09

The Taoiseach is in Brussels today at an EU summit where he is set to agree to hold a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty by next October.

A draft agreement, to be presented to the summit this evening, sets out a series of steps that the French presidency hopes will be enough to secure ratification of the Lisbon Treaty in Ireland.

'The Irish government is committed to seeking ratification of the Lisbon Treaty by the end of the term of the current commission,' the text said.

The Taoiseach will discuss the Irish view with EU colleagues today and tomorrow,' a spokesman for the Government said, declining to comment further.

All states would firstly agree that if the Lisbon Treaty comes into force, they will use its provision to ensure every country keeps a permanent commissioner [dream on; there is no way of holding them to this promise. It can be revoked without a backward glance once the Irish electorate have accepted the Treaty].

The second step would see a series of legally binding guarantees being drafted over the next six months by the Czech presidency on issues of concern to Ireland [Melancholicus would tend to mistrust the Czechs less than he mistrusts the French, but there is no reason why 'legally binding guarantees' must always remain so. Laws often are, by force of events and circumstance, subject to constant revision].

If those guarantees are acceptable, then the Government promises to hold a referendum by the end of the term of this Commission, which would normally [be] the end of next October [the Irish government is going to do the bidding of its EU paymasters anyway, regardless of whether any 'guarantees' offered are acceptable or not].

The draft also sets out the areas of concern to Ireland, including military neutrality, tax sovereignty and the primacy of the Irish constitution on social issues, such as abortion and marriage laws [while it is heartening to see that social issues are addressed, at the very least by being mentioned, once the Lisbon Treaty is ratified it is very doubtful whether any of the 27 constituent nations will have the powers to retain their own laws on issues like marriage and abortion against the uniform social engineering desired by the European Commission].

It includes new language on the protection of workers rights, and the provision of public services like health and education by government and local authorities.

We knew this development must surely come, but for all that it is no less bitter to the taste, and no less hard to swallow.

We shall see if these promised ‘guarantees’ will actually come to anything. But Melancholicus shall not be holding his breath.

The final referendum results

Melancholicus offers his apologies to those readers from outside the European Union, and to those who couldn’t care less about the Lisbon Treaty, but for those who have borne with him thus far there is now some good news. This (barring a radical change of political circumstances) will be his final post on Lisbon, after which we can all go home for the weekend. Melancholicus will begin posting once again on more interesting matters early next week.

Results are now in from the last of the undeclared constituencies and, as was apparent even from early this morning, Ireland has rejected the Lisbon Treaty and thrown a spanner into the works of the European Union. The EU constitution, resurrected after a fashion in the articles of Lisbon, is now well and truly dead. The French and the Dutch three years ago voted not in vain.

It’s all over now, and we can go happily back to our business now that the bugbear has been brought down. There will of course be a great deal of soul-searching in the days and weeks to come; our political leaders will be asking themselves what they did wrong, and agonising over the result like a championship team that came within a hair’s breadth of winning the cup final but was pipped at the last. Just wait and see how long it will be until the various factions within the Yes campaign begin apportioning blame among their fellows, if they have not begun this political blood-sport already. The commissars, frothing with ill-concealed fury, have already begun their snarling at the disobedient Irish electorate, but we will bear their opprobrium patiently; they can snarl all they like, but that won’t change the fact that we have shot down their sneaky attempt to overmaster us. There are rumours that some states may attempt to ratify the Treaty anyway; this seems to contradict what we were told by both Brussels and by our political leaders, to the end that the Treaty cannot go into effect unless ratified by all 27 states together.

In any case this is a setback for the commissars, but not the end of the road. If the reader remembers, the Irish electorate rejected the Treaty of Nice in a similar referendum in 2001, whereupon the referendum was put to us again — and passed — the following year. Melancholicus suspects that after a discreet interval, when the hubbub has died down, a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty will be offered to the Irish electorate — and whether they will say No a second time remains to be seen.

Now, for the record, here are the results from the last five constituencies outside Dublin:

Meath West: No (55.5% to 44.5%)
Laois/Offaly: Yes (56% to 44%)
Cork North-West: No (53.9% to 46.1%)
Cork South-West: No (55.6% to 44.4%)
Cork East: No (57% to 43%)

And the last three Dublin constituencies:

Dublin North-Central: Yes (50.6% to 49.4%)
Dublin North-East: No (56.8% to 43.2%)
Dublin North-West: No (63.6% to 36.4%)

And that all looks fairly decisive. Only four constituencies outside Dublin voted Yes overall; the result in a fifth was a dead heat. Everywhere else the No vote was clear. Even in the capital, the greatest hope of the Yes campaign, seven of the twelve Dublin constituencies rejected the Treaty. Melancholicus would actually have lost the bet referred to in the previous post, as Laois/Offaly was the last constituency to declare (and it voted Yes, it being the Taoiseach’s constituency).

What a disaster for the Irish government! What a disaster for the commissars!

But how good for Ireland, and for the people of Europe!

Further results

Outside Dublin:

Galway West rejected the Treaty by a more generous margin than Galway East (53.9% to 46.1%). Of considerable interest is that the result is tied in a dead heat in Carlow/Kilkenny — 50.0% both for and against!

In Dublin:

Three of the six inner Dublin constituencies have now returned results. Dublin Central (Bertie Ahern’s constituency incidentally) and Dublin South-Central both voted No. The more affluent Dublin South-East has voted Yes, with a margin of 61.7% to 38.3%.

Only eight constituencies left, three in Dublin and five outside Dublin. Melancholicus is still waiting on his home constituency of Dublin North-West, but if he were a betting man he would put money on one of the three outer Cork constituencies being the last in the country to declare.

Not too much longer now...

Lisbon Treaty rejected in most constituencies

As time passes, results are becoming available from more and more constituencies. What is striking is the number of constituencies that have voted No.

Outside Dublin, the only constituencies that have delivered a Yes vote are Meath East (by the slenderest margin, 50.9% to 49.1%) and Clare (by another slender margin, 51.8% to 48.2%). The only constituency outside of Dublin that has delivered a convincing Yes vote is, oddly enough, Kildare North (54.6% to 45.4%).

Every other constituency for which results were available at the time of this writing rejected the Treaty — although in some cases the result was extremely close (Wicklow, for instance, which voted No 50.2% to 49.8%).

We are still waiting on the three outlying Cork constituencies, as well as on Galway West, Laois/Offaly, Meath West and Carlow/Kilkenny.

The situation in Dublin is, as expected, a little different. Results are in for all the outer Dublin constituencies, but from not even one constituency in inner Dublin. Dublin West, Dublin Mid-West and Dublin South-West all voted No, by an ever increasing margin towards the south. Dublin North, Dublin South and Dún Laoghaire voted Yes (although the margin in Dublin North was slender — 50.6% to 49.4%).

The biggest margin in favour of the Treaty recorded so far is in Dún Laoghaire, where 63.5% of those who voted cast a Yes vote.

There are as yet no results for Melancholicus’ own constituency of Dublin North-West.

Still No

The time is 14:30.

The margin between the two sides has not narrowed, it has widened! Fully half of all constituencies have now declared a final result.

This most recent update courtesy of RTÉ:

“With results in from 21 of the 43 constituencies, the Lisbon Treaty is being beaten by a margin of 54.6% to 45.4%. That margin is expected to tighten as more results are announced, but the result is not in doubt.”

Results are now in from both Dublin South and Dún Laoghaire. As expected, both constituencies delivered a Yes vote (by margins of 62.9% to 37.1% and 63.5% to 36.5% respectively).

See the top ten Yes/No constituency results here.

The latest

The time is 14:00.

The most recent update courtesy of RTÉ:

“With results in from 10 of the 43 constituencies, the Lisbon Treaty is being beaten by a margin of 53.6% to 46.4%. That margin is expected to tighten as more results are announced, but the result is not in doubt.”

No in Dublin South-West

The time is 13:45.

With the biggest margin against the Lisbon Treaty declared in any result so far, Dublin South-West has voted No at 65-35. This is a predominately working-class constituency, and socialists and other lefties tend to do well in elections here. Accordingly, the electorate’s rejection of the Treaty is no surprise.

We still await the results from the much more affluent Dublin South and Dún Laoghaire constituencies.

Update

Looking good so far. They’re already celebrating victory over at Credo, but Melancholicus shall wait until the final result is officially announced before popping any corks, and in any case ... he’s still at work.

From RTÉ:

Irish voters set to reject Lisbon Treaty

Friday, 13 June 2008 13:26

It seems certain that Irish voters have rejected the Lisbon Treaty.

Although official results are only starting to come in, tallies of votes have shown a very strong No vote right across the country.

Waterford was the first constituency to declare an official result - and it was unequivocal, rejecting Lisbon by 54-46, while Sligo-North Letrim voted no by 57-43. Tipperary South also voted No, by 53-46 as did Tipperary North by 50.2-49.80. Waterford also voted to reject the Treaty by 54-46.

In Sligo-North Leitrim, the No vote was higher than was recorded in the first Nice Referendum, and if as seems likely it is followed in other parts of the country, the Lisbon Treaty looks certain to be defeated.

Tallies from other constituencies show the strength of the No vote across the country, with just a handful of constituencies looking like they will vote yes.

The margin of victory for the No side may be a bit tighter than was suggested in the initial tallies - but there seems little doubt that it is a victory.

The final official result is expected to be announced late this afternoon.

Tallies of votes have indicated there has been a strong No vote - although the Yes side appeared to have made up some ground.

The nationwide trend had indicated a very strong showing by opponents of the Lisbon Treaty - but as the morning went on and tallies became more complete, the Yes side has regained some ground.

Complete tallies are available from around half the constituencies - although they come with a strong warning that some of them may not be all that accurate.

Judging by those tallies, middle class constituencies like Dublin South, Dublin South East and Dún Laoghaire seem likely to have a 60-40 vote in favour of Lisbon.

However the No vote was said to be ahead in Dublin North West, Dublin Central, Cork North Central and South Central, both Kerry constituencies, both Tipperary constituencies, and Galway West.

Early tallies had pointed to a very strong showing by the No vote.

The No vote was strong in many rural areas and in working class districts of cities, while middle class areas appeared to be less supportive of the treaty than had been anticipated.

In urban areas, middle class areas by and large appeared to have voted in favour of the treaty - but not by the normal large margin, and not by enough to counteract the large No in working class areas.

In Mayo, Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny has forecast his home constituency will vote against the treaty.

Turnout is estimated to have been in the mid-40s percentage range. After years of negotiation and months of debate, the fate of the Lisbon Treaty will be known within hours.

Each constituency counts its own votes separately, and then sends the result to the Referendum Returning Officer in Dublin Castle, who will announce the overall result.

With a 60-40 margin in favour of the Treaty in south Dublin (home to the Mercedes, BMW and Jaguar-driving demographic), which is bigger than the margins by which the Treaty has been defeated in rural constituencies, shall Dublin swing the final result back toward the Yes side? Dublin contains not much less than a third of the whole electorate. Victory for the No side is not assured.

In any case, we still await the definitive outcome.

It's happening already...

The latest news, from RTÉ:

No vote strong in early Lisbon tallies

Friday, 13 June 2008 10:52

Early tallies in the Lisbon Referendum count from constituencies around the country suggest the Treaty may be in some difficulty.

The No vote is strong in many rural areas and in working class districts of cities, while middle class areas appear to be less supportive of the Treaty than had been anticipated.

However, these are only tallies, and it is very early in the count to be too definitive about the outcome. Firmer indications are due late this morning.

While it is far too early to be definitive, the Yes side are not too happy with the early indications.

Turnout is estimated to have been in the mid-40s percentage range. After years of negotiation and months of debate, the fate of the Lisbon Treaty will be known within hours.

The final official result is expected to be announced late this afternoon, but tallies from the 43 constituencies should give a good indication of the likely outcome late this morning.

Each constituency counts its own votes separately, and then sends the result to the Referendum Returning Officer in Dublin Castle, who will announce the overall result.

Turnout is thought to have been higher than in the first Nice Referendum, which was defeated, but lower than in the second, which was passed.

However, with recent opinion polls suggesting that supporters of the treaty were more likely to vote, a lower turnout is not necessarily good news for the No side.

The emphasis in the above is our own, and does not appear in the original.

So far all seems to be moving in the right direction.

The morning after

The referendum has been held, and we are now breathlessly awaiting news of the first returns. It is 10:20am at the time of writing, and counting began only 80 minutes ago. RTÉ will broadcast a special programme on the results of the referendum at 12:30, to which Melancholicus intends to listen while sitting at his desk and discharging the obligations of his state.

Melancholicus had a busy day yesterday, but he presented himself at his local polling station at 6.30pm and exercised his democratic right by casting his vote. Turnout all over the country was poor, no more than 45% on average. If past referenda are anything to go by, a low turnout tends to favour the naysayers. So Melancholicus expects that the result, when it is made public, shall be a definitive rejection of the Lisbon Treaty — unless of course the Irish government shall have had recourse to that favourite tactic of third world countries and banana republics, namely vote rigging.

As the result is likely to be a rejection of the Treaty and the ire of the Brussels autocracy against the Irish electorate is likely to be hot indeed, Melancholicus thinks it prudent not to announce publicly which way he voted, lest the commissars or their agents be trawling the blogs looking for enemies of the European state, for surely someone will have to pay for having thus spoiled The Grand Project. Extraordinary rendition to a gaol in eastern Germany, anyone?

Melancholicus is jesting of course, but if the Lisbon Treaty were passed, and the EU continued to evolve into a super-state with powers exceeding those of the nations... well, liberalism has oft degenerated into totalitarianism in the past, so why might it not do so again?

In any case, Melancholicus’ regular readers already know which way he voted.

All you ever wanted to know about Lisbon, but were afraid to ask

During a lengthy interview on The Right Hook over on Newstalk 106 yesterday evening, Melancholicus heard the most compelling case yet made for a No vote, and it has strengthened his conviction that when he votes No this coming Thursday, he shall be acting aright, in the interests of not only this country but of the other 26 nations who together make up the constituent states of the European Union.

For Melancholicus must admit to having experienced, over the course of the last week, a crisis of conscience which caused him to vacillate on the referendum, even to the extent of wondering if he ought not to vote Yes.

This largely because all the movers and shakers in Irish business and politics are solidly in favour of ratifying the Lisbon Treaty; the Irish bishops are, if not for the Treaty, at least not against it; and even the most recent issue of the Irish Catholic newspaper, while not committing itself absolutely one way or the other (much like the bishops) seemed to favour a Yes vote.

On the other hand, the No campaign is led by persons with decidedly less impressive credentials. The only political party currently with representation in the Dáil that advocates a No vote is Sinn Féin, a party of decidedly marxist hue, not to mention its close links with the now dormant IRA. Furthermore, Melancholicus doesn’t really know who Libertas and Cóir (two groups prominently opposing Lisbon) are, or where they have come from, even though he is broadly in sympathy with the objections they urge against the Treaty. Then there is Youth Defence (enough said). Finally, the Treaty is also opposed by a mixum-gatherum of far-left parties and far-left individuals, and in opposing Lisbon Melancholicus found himself in the unenviable position of being on the same side of the divide even as the socialists.

Necessity, as they say, is the mother of strange bedfellows.

Melancholicus is concerned that many persons intending to cast their vote on Thursday might vote Yes simply because of all the kooky people currently advocating a No vote — which would be for the wrong reason entirely — for he was himself almost on the point of defecting to the Yes camp precisely because of all the kooky people on the No side.

This despite the fact that the Yes side has been unable to offer a single compelling reason why the Treaty must be ratified; catch-calls such as “let’s make Europe work better” and “for jobs, the economy and Ireland’s future” and “let’s make Europe more democratic” are slogans and nothing more, since they do not provide us with any details on how, precisely, ratifying the Treaty will accomplish any of these things.

Let us also not confuse “Europe” (i.e. the institutions) with the 27 sovereign nations over which these institutions preside.

In any case, sense has now prevailed, and Melancholicus has his mind comfortably made up on the matter.

But back to Newstalk. Hookie’s guest was Professor Gwyn Prins of the London School of Economics who, unlike many of those who have offered their opinions in the columns of the newspapers and on the airwaves, has actually studied the text of the Treaty itself in some detail, was able to speak from a position of knowledge and authority, and what he had to say ought to have made sobering listening for any thinking of voting Yes.

Among the startling claims made by Professor Prins — in the face of rigorous cross-examination by Hookie — and contrary to the assurances offered us by our political and economic leaders, are the following:

• The Lisbon Treaty reproduces the substance (95% or thereabouts) of the European Constitution rejected in referenda by the French and the Dutch in 2005.


• The Lisbon Treaty IS self-amending, despite the vehement denials that have issued forth from both Brussels and Leinster House.


• In the arena of defence and foreign policy, the Lisbon Treaty WILL create a European army.


• Ireland’s veto in regard to taxation is NOT safe once Lisbon is ratified.


• Brussels WILL have greater powers to overrule the laws of any of the constituent 27 nations.


• The loss of representation imposed by the new structures decreed into existence by Lisbon IS proportionally much greater for the small nations than for the larger.

There were many other points also, but these seemed to Melancholicus to be the most significant, so he shall leave the matter there.

So we must now ask ourselves, is Professor Prins lying? What he is telling us is absolutely contrary to what our politicians are telling us, so it is clear that both positions cannot be correct. Therefore, who is wrong?

Once again, is Professor Prins lying? Melancholicus is inclined to think not. For Professor Prins has, personally, less at stake than the politicians, and less motive to tell blatant untruths.

Not to mention the fact that we are all of us thoroughly accustomed to the ways of politicians, with their habitual lying. That our Taoiseach, or his ministers, or the leaders of the other parties in the Dáil, might lie to us should surely surprise no one.

Maybe the socialists are right after all. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

So, gentle reader and compatriot, are you still thinking of voting Yes?

Orwellian society update: bureaucratic secrecy in Brussels

So much for the much-touted open and accountable EU. These fellows already don’t want the rest of us to know what they’re up to in Brussels, and they expect us to give them even more power by voting Yes to the Lisbon Treaty on June 12th?

I suppose there’s one born every minute, but Melancholicus is not impressed.

From The Times:

European watchdog attacks cloak of secrecy in Brussels

David Charter in Brussels

A shroud of secrecy will be drawn over the workings of the European Union under new proposals to limit access to documents and in some cases deny that they even exist, the European Ombudsman cautioned in a strongly worded attack yesterday.

MEPs were called on by the watchdog to stand up for openness in Brussels and oppose an attempt by the European Commission to reclassify which documents are available for public scrutiny.

Plans to withhold papers unless they are formally listed in a new register of documents would deny access to important material and break promises of transparency made under the new Lisbon treaty, the watchdog said.

The changes are being debated under a proposed directive that Margot Wallstrom, the EU Information Commissioner, says is needed to make the rules less vague but which her critics fear will plunge the EU into another secrecy row.

This year the European Parliament refused to release an auditor’s report on widespread abuse of expenses. It can be read only by a small group of MEPs who must go into a secret room and swear not to take notes or talk about the contents.

“The Commission’s proposals would mean access to fewer, not more, documents,” said Nikiforos Diamandouros, the Ombudsman, at a hearing in the European Parliament. “This raises fundamental issues of principle about the EU’s commitment to openness and transparency.”

He gave warning that the changes would mean the European Commission “could share documents informally with a limited number of favoured external recipients of its choice, without having to give public access to them”.

The Ombudsman added: “The Commission’s proposals not only ignore the lessons of the past, but also the new promises to citizens, civil society and representative associations made in the treaty of Lisbon.”

Ian Harden, the secretary-general of the Ombudsman, added that under the proposed register, the Commission could simply argue that papers did not exist if journalists or others requested them.

But Mrs Wallstrom denied that the proposed measures meant that any document currently available would in future be withheld. She added that the new definition of documents was needed to ensure that access was better understood by the public, implying that the current system had been misused by lobbyists.

Methinks she doth protest too much. Perhaps “lobbyists” have indeed made themselves a nuisance by “misusing” the system. But why do the rest of us have to be punished for the alleged offences of these unspecified persons? Think of how convenient for some it would be for all the documentary evidence of the EU’s internal workings simply to disappear, as though into thin air. The commissars would have to explain themselves to no one. They would likewise be accountable to no one. If there is no record of their meeting, that means they never met. If there is no record of their discussion or of the decisions they made, that means no decisions were ever arrived at. And if there is no record of their deeds, that means they never acted.

So they can be reproached with nothing, and not called to account for anything at all.

Dictatorship, anyone?

H/T to Credo.

Want to read the Lisbon Treaty?

The text is available in PDF format from the EU bookshop here.

Or interested parties may order a hard copy for €42.

Melancholicus has at least browsed through the thing, but he has no intention of actually reading it, since he is not a lawyer and in any case since the Lisbon Treaty is composed of a series of amendments to earlier treaties, it cannot be read in isolation. Nevertheless, he makes it available primarily to his fellow countrymen in order that they might make an ‘informed’ decision.

Less than one week to go to the referendum, so hurry up and read it!

The Irish bishops on Lisbon

Not to be outdone, the Irish bishops’ conference has released a pastoral letter offering guidance to the Catholic faithful of this country on the thorny question of the Lisbon Treaty. It is available (pdf format) here. There is also a press release on the pastoral here.

Having read the bishops’ five-page document and expecting some form of clarification from the Church on the issues at stake in the referendum, Melancholicus was reduced to feeling much like Omar Khayyam who, in search of answers, “frequented both doctor and saint” but afterwards “went out by that same door where in I went”.

This because the poor idiot forgot that in dealing with the Irish bishops’ conference he was dealing with an organ of the conciliar church, and the documents put out by all such organs tend to be characterised by a studied ambiguity that is almost breathtakingly anglican in its refusal to commit itself to any particular position if other positions are thereby excluded.

On the first page of their pastoral, the bishops call on the faithful to “study and reflect prayerfully on the contents of the Treaty”, while reminding us that “there is a responsibility on all of us to exercise our franchise by casting our ballot”. So far so good, but any member of Fianna Fáil could have told us as much. The bishops then “condemn unreservedly those who would seek to influence the outcome of the referendum either by offering misleading or even patently incorrect advice or by introducing extraneous factors into the debate”. This has been taken in some circles as a condemnation of the No campaign. However, misinformation and dire warnings are by no means restricted to groups campaigning for a No vote; on how many occasions have not only our own politicians but also EU commissars threatened us with the end of the world and with dire economic misery should we have the temerity to exercise our democratic right to vote No?

Shall we permit ourselves to be bullied by these ‘gentlemen’?

The bishops then pass on to a discussion of ‘values’ in Europe, with reference to ‘Europe’s Christian heritage’. Completely absent from the thought of these our shepherds and successors of the Apostles is any awareness that ‘values’ is a subjective and essentially secular term that can be invested with whatever nuances of meaning that one wishes; it does not necessarily involve adherence to the natural law, to the good, or to right reason. Absent also is any recognition — never mind condemnation — that the EU is essentially a godless and secular institution which has very deliberately cast aside its Christian heritage in favour of a post-Enlightenment French revolutionary world view. But then the fog of bewilderment introduced into Catholic social and political life by Dignitatis Humanae has rendered the bishops unable even to notice such things.

True to form, the bishops do not inform us whether ratification of the Lisbon Treaty will usher in the sort of ‘values’ they expect the Catholic faithful to be interested in, never mind whether it will preserve whatever vestiges may remain of Europe’s Christian heritage — all of which makes the point of their pastoral rather redundant, unless the point is restricted merely to telling us that we must vote. This is probably because they can’t, rather than because they won’t. The Treaty is sufficiently complex as to permit possible future developments in a direction that no-one (whether in the Yes or No camp) can have foreseen with any certainty.

The bishops then move on to the sort of Europe “we want for our children”. Here again there is much concentration on ‘values’ (let the reader count how many times the bishops use this word throughout their pastoral) with a mixture of praise and criticism of the contemporary world. This is fine as far as it goes, but what has it to do with the Lisbon Treaty? Reading some passages of this pastoral, one could be sure that the bishops are calling for a No vote, but turn over the page and one would be prepared to swear on one’s grandmother’s grave that the bishops are urging their flock to vote Yes.

Finally, at the bottom of p. 5 and in a state of total dissatisfaction and bewilderment, one finds a reflection on St. Theresa Benedicta of the Cross, co-patroness of Europe. Anxiously racing through the last few lines, during which the bishops obligingly condemn Nazism and the holocaust, we are convinced that before it ends the bishops will surely give us their recommendation on whether ratification of the Lisbon Treaty is good for Ireland.

Except they don’t.

What a let down! After nearly two centuries of Irish Catholics happily being able to depend upon the hierarchy for instructions to vote this way or that, the bishops have finally broken with tradition and have washed their hands of the matter — leaving us frustratingly ill-advised facing a referendum in which this voter at least would actually have welcomed some kind of recommendation from the hierarchy, however contrary it may have been to his own inclinations, a recommendation more specific than simply “go out and vote”.

If every manner of man in this country can have a position on the Lisbon Treaty, why not also the bishops?

The Treaty of Lisbon

As has been mentioned before on this journal, the Irish electorate will vote in a referendum to be held in about six weeks’ time on whether Ireland shall ratify the Treaty of Lisbon.

Melancholicus will not here and now delve into the intricacies of European integration, or what ratification of this latest treaty will do for Ireland or for Europe generally. That is not the issue. For he has already made up his mind, when the time comes for him to exercise his suffrage, to reject the Treaty of Lisbon. He shall vote No, and he encourages any of his fellow countrymen that might be reading this to do the same.

Ireland is the ONLY European nation the government of which is holding a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. Melancholicus thus feels he has a moral duty to vote No, not only for the sake of Ireland, but for the uncounted millions of other Europeans in this allegedly democratic age whose governments have denied them the opportunity to do so themselves.

Even if there were no urgent political reason to reject this treaty — and there are reasons aplenty — Melancholicus would still vote No, if only out of sheer bloody-mindedness, for he has found the arrogance and the high-handedness of the Yes campaign to be insufferable. This very morning en route to the university, he listened to an unsatisfactory radio debate between John McGuirk of Libertas and Dick Roche TD, Minister for European Affairs. This debate was unsatisfactory because it was not calm and reasoned, but a shouting match, and Melancholicus was shocked by the arrogant and dismissive bluster of Minister Roche. Even if every word spoken by the Minister were true, Melancholicus was repelled by the attitude of the man, who seemed to be personally affronted that a No campaign should even exist in Ireland.

So much for democracy.

This high-handed attitude is not unique to Minister Roche, for Melancholicus has observed it also in the Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, and in Eamonn Gilmore, leader of the Labour Party, and in several other Dáil deputies from a broad spectrum of political backgrounds and beliefs. Yet — with the singular exception of Sinn Féin — all seem to be united in an unduly vehement (not to say desperate) insistence that Ireland MUST ratify the Treaty of Lisbon and that consequently the Irish electorate MUST vote Yes in the forthcoming referendum.

Who are these politicians to tell us what to do? We are not accountable to them, or to the EU commissars in Brussels. On the contrary, isn’t the whole principle of democracy founded on the notion that we elect these people to respresent us? Are not they, then, accountable to us? And should we decide to say No in June, whence comes the justification for their righteous indignation?

Moreover, the government of this Republic of Ireland has not provided its citizens with any information whatever on even the most important consequences of the Lisbon Treaty. The government is aware that most Irish people haven’t the foggiest idea what they are voting for, yet there has been no official attempt to assist members of the public in making an informed decision. The only attempts to do so have proceeded from the No campaign, from groups like Libertas that have been so stridently denounced by our political leaders on the airwaves. Can it be that the Irish government doesn’t want the people to know what is contained in the Lisbon Treaty? Can it be because if the Irish people knew what they were voting for, they might possibly vote No? The failure of the government to provide the electorate with any information on the Lisbon Treaty, as well as its treatment of us as mere children in the most condescending manner imaginable, is more than reason enough to defy our politicians and most resolutely vote No. Who votes Yes to ratify a treaty they know nothing about?

In any case, there is hardly any point voting at all. In the exercise of their democratic rights, the Irish electorate rejected the Treaty of Nice in a referendum held in June 2001. As this result was unacceptable to the EU, the Irish were required to repeat this referendum in October 2002. On this second occasion, the desired Yes vote was achieved, but even if it had not been, the referendum would have been held repeatedly until the Irish electorate finally agreed to ratification.

It is likely that ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon will be achieved in the same way. Even if the Irish electorate reject the Treaty this coming June, the referendum will be put to us again and again until we agree to ratify the thing, so the EU commissars need not be overly disturbed by an initial rejection.

And so the future of Europe shall, for the average citizen of countries such as Ireland, be characterised by steadily diminishing representation, steadily diminishing powers of suffrage and self-determination, and the steady increase of soft totalitarianism, as unaccountable and unelected commissions and appointees gradually replace parliaments and elected representatives, and as referenda are emptied of their democratic purpose by being repeatedly put to the electorate until the desired result be achieved.

Under such conditions, what need of a referendum at all?