In October, Ireland voted to endorse
the controversial treaty of Nice. Now
the European Commission, charged with drafting a European constitution has made its first report.
The Irish referendum was the second in just over a year and was outrageously undemocratic. The first referendum rejected the Nice treaty by a 54-46 margin. This was declared invalid on the basis of a low turnout of 34%. The real reason was that the vote had gone the wrong way. If the decision had been "Yes', the poll would have been declared a great victory and accepted without reservation.
Ireland was never going to be allowed to stick to its decision. The Nice treaty had to be endorsed by every member state before it became valid.
It is crucial to the future of the EU as constructed by the Maastricht, Amsterdam and then Nice treaties. Ireland is the only EU member state required by its constitution to put new treaties to a popular vote.
The treaty of Nice was presented as one •• ever, it was about a restructuring of the EU for its next phase of development, with the domination of the most powerful members states at its core.
The Nice treaty further strengthens the EU as a bosses' Europe based on a neo-liberal, privatised, deregulated designed to increase the profitability of the employers, increase the power of multinational capital, maximise flexibility in the work-place, and cut the welfare state.
At stake at Nice was who will be the real decision-makers in the EU under enlargement, the first round of which is due in two years time.
If EU structures were not reformed, enlargement would automatically shift the balance of power towards the smaller countries by diluting the influence of the biggest and most powerful. This was unacceptable to the big countries, who have long wanted a major shift in the other direction -which is what they got. The result was a further erosion of democracy within the EU.
The Nice treaty extends Qualified Majority Voting in the Council of Ministers,
the big powers. model, A Nice goes the same process. • • • brings about a radical reallocation of voting power between the member states, and reallocates Commissioners and seats in the European Parliament, all to the advantage of
The eventual Yes' vote in the Irish referendum clears the way for the so-called super-summit in June 2004. The current stage of enlargement is due to be completed and ten of the applicant countries accepted into some form of membership -even if it is as second-class citizens forming a course of cheap labour and with restrictions on their right of movement within the EU.
Alongside the implementation of the European Convention - the other strand of The European Convention has been meeting since March and is presided over by Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, the former Gaullist President of
It consists of delegates chosen by both things are going. the member states and the candidate states Its brief is to draft a proposed EU constitution - important if the drive towards a
duces The 7287 2772 [email protected] Chomsky. (12NOON) The second session heard a panel of
lCgt
Already paying too high a price: thousands of French strikers march through Marseille in their protest against privatisation European super-state is to continue.
The purpose of all this is to create an EU which can effectively challenge North American capital at both the economic and political level. This means creating an integrated political leadership that can act with the sort of authority and speed the US government is able to act with.
Although there are inevitably battles within the Convention on the rate and degree of integration, those pressing for a super state are in the driving seat.
Giscard d'Estaing has controversially proposed that the name of the EU be changed to the United States of Europe. This will not be accepted, but it gives a flavour of where
The proposals under consideration are the ending of the current rotating presidency and the establishment of a permanent ing class.
-apprepriation pu president of the EU - something Blair has come out in favour of. This is seen as impor tant to the development of a common European identity.
Also being discussed is the ending of the national veto in key areas such as taxation and asylum, and the EU is to be given a 'single legal identity'. Further integration is to take place in foreign and defence policy and further integration of the military itself witt common arms procurement.
Whatever is eventually agreed, it is cer. tain that what will emerge will be a less democratic EU, not a more democratic EU. This gives added weight to the decision of the Socialist Alliance to campaign for a "No' vote in a referendum and the need to begin to construct an anti-nationalistic campaign which can defend the interests of the work-