Irish democrats still say no to Lisbon

There was a nice article published in the Guardian yesterday by Declan Ganley. It's interesting to see such a piece in the usually pro-everything-EU paper.

Being Irish, it's hard to imagine how it must appear to an outsider looking at our second referendum on the Lisbon treaty. At least somebody out there reading this must be jealous – we get to vote twice and you don't get to vote at all. Perhaps the most interesting thing about our re-vote is the way in which it was regarded as a certainty after the original referendum. The votes were literally not counted before some Irish media personalities, and EU leaders, were speculating on a timeline for round two. You see, "no" results are never about the treaty. No. They are about domestic issues, or people are misinformed, or enemies of Europe have lied to the poor unsuspecting people. By contrast, "yes" votes are ringing endorsements of Brussels, based on informed, thoughtful analysis.

As such, we Irish behaved badly, and were therefore required as a matter of course to vote again. Nearly every EU leader agrees with this. Their own people must not vote, but the Irish must vote twice. It would be funny – a parody in fact – were it not real. It is what has become of the European Union, and it is the single most compelling reason to reject the treaty again.

Europe cannot go on like this. Opponents cannot continue to be treated as dissident enemies of the state (for a state is what this treaty creates) who must be undermined and smeared at every opportunity. I use my own experience not to beseech your pity in this regard, but as an example. In the last 18 months, as I tried to highlight these issues both in Ireland and around Europe, I have been attacked by EU leaders and officials variously as a CIA agent, a KGB asset, an MI5 plant, an agent of the neoconservative movement (the evils of whom are assumed in aGodwinesque fashion), a eurosceptic, a religious extremist and a neo-Nazi. I kid you not.

And what have we, the opponents of the treaty, been saying to merit this kind of attitude? Well, we think it's anti-democratic. We think it sends more and more power to Brussels and sends nothing in the way of democratic accountability in the other direction. It creates a president, a job which is being fought over at this very moment in smoke-filled rooms around Europe without regard to the views of the citizenry. This person will be our spokesperson for years to come, and their views will largely determine the agenda, voice, and direction of an EU council that will be more powerful than ever. You and I have no say on who this will be. It creates a foreign minister in the same fashion. An EU diplomatic corps. It expands ever further the reach of the commission, that unelected bureau in whom is vested the sole power to initiate, conservatively, 60% of member state law. It vests in the European parliament the power only to amend or suggest certain approaches, and it continues the trend away from subsidiarity towards centralisation.

Our politicians love it. It's easy to see why. Adam Smith's invisible hand of profit guides their action, though in this case their profits are not directly financial. It is another step in the dramatisation of politics. Our leaders at home will continue to present themselves before us, but have fewer and fewer responsibilities. A single prime minister alone cannot be blamed for every irritating EU directive. Your local MP cannot take responsibility for decisions made in Brussels. Our leaders have a permanent pension home, and a chance to stride the world stage as leader of what would be the world's second or third political power.

The Lisbon treaty makes politics easier for politicians, and makes political change harder to achieve for citizens. It locks in an economic approach as if history itself has ended. It locks in social legislation as if society has ceased to evolve. It treats the challenges of today as permanent, and ultimately, it redefines democracy as something Brussels aspires to, rather than something we all have a right to. Voting twice? If we say yes, voting once on anything may be a very rare privilege indeed.