In our head to head on the Lisbon Treaty, below John Mc Guirk of Libertas argues for a No vote in the
upcoming Irish referendum, while Eric Keane of Young Fine Gael calls for a Yes vote here.

The
European Union is almost universally acknowledged to suffer from what
is known as a “democratic deficit”.  This refers to the fact
that there exists a large gulf between the ordinary citizen and those
who are responsible for generating the 80 percent of Irish law that
emanates from Brussels.

The European Union has immense influence over the lives of almost half
a billion people - but those responsible for initiating Union policy
are appointed, not elected.

They are answerable to national
governments, but domestic political considerations hugely outweigh any
degree to which those governments can be held responsible for the
actions of people appointed collectively by 27 Prime Ministers.

The
European Parliament, the only one of the Great EU institutions which is
directly elected by the people, is the weakest and least consequential
of Europe’s institutions, and it will remain so after Lisbon, despite
getting very modest additional responsibility.

In addition, any
election to the EU Parliament is almost exclusively fought on domestic
political ground, rather than on a substantive debate on EU policy. In
Ireland, the opposition will almost always urge the electorate to give
the Government a “kicking” during the parliament elections. This
conflicts, of course, with their telling people to not do so during EU
referenda, because the issues are “too important”.

We can see the
consequences of the democratic deficit in Brussels already. For 13
years, the EU has failed to have its accounts signed off by the Union’s
own court of auditors.

A report on corruption in the EU parliament is,
openly and shamelessly, being withheld from publication indefinitely.
The Department of the Taoiseach itself estimates that “unnecessary”
regulation from Brussels costs Irish Business hundreds of millions
annually. In a democratic Union, — or in any democratic state, this
state of affairs would be punished by the electorate.

Lisbon
entrenches and makes much more severe the lack of democracy in
Brussels.

It provides for a President of the Council, and what in
effect amounts to an EU Foreign Minister, both of whom are being
provided for in order to solve the old problem spotlighted by Henry
Kissinger — “When I want to talk to Europe, who do I call?” Both
positions will have the power to speak collectively for all of Europe
on the great global issues of the day, and neither will have a mandate
from the people. Isn’t that a problem?

Why would it be difficult to
elect both positions directly? Such an exercise in democracy would
bring Europe together, and provide the people elected with a mandate to
tackle issues like corruption in the Union, and to speak for all of
Europe with real moral authority. Instead, the EU is being made even
more powerful, and at the same time, yet more remote from the people.

In our view, Lisbon is symptomatic of the contempt for the democratic will that has become all pervasive in Brussels.

This
document is almost identical to a document democratically rejected,
twice, by two of the Union’s founding members. It has been altered
slightly, and now it its ratification is happening over the heads of
the very people who rejected it in France and the Netherlands.

No
true democrat can watch this happening without feeling very severe
disquiet, can they? Proponents of the Treaty are often keen to say how
it “streamlines” decision-making in Brussels, and how it “makes Europe
more efficient”. Democracy by its nature isn’t efficient. We feel that
every time Brussels takes a decision that affects the lives of half a
billion people, that decision should be difficult. We should say No to
this Treaty.

- John Mc Guirk, spokesperson Libertas

MORE: Lisbon Treaty head to head: Yes 
MORE: Majority of students in dark over EU treaty