DICK ROCHE has done the State and its voters a considerable public service by arguing that it may be necessary to hold another referendum on the Lisbon Treaty because of the emerging political consequences of June's decisive vote against it.
Mr Roche spoke on his own, not the Government's behalf, in rejecting the idea of legislating the treaty in whole or in part through the Oireachtas after a vote by the sovereign people. But he was right to underline the urgency and importance of what is at stake for Ireland's international position.
Ireland's partners in the European Union are in no mood to renegotiate the treaty, he told the Humbert summer school in Ballina, undermining one of the No campaign's main assumptions. Instead, by huge majorities in their parliaments and with the passive support of most of their electorates, they are ratifying it. That would leave Ireland isolated in the company of dogmatic Eurosceptics this autumn unless a constructive plan to deal with these realities is rapidly brought forward. Informed political debate on the available options is essential for that. It will be enhanced when the research commissioned by the Government on why people voted as they did becomes available next month. These results should be published to deepen public understanding.
If encounters such as that in Ballina or on the broadcast media yesterday help to clarify these options they are to be welcomed for performing a public function that was lamentably absent from the referendum campaign itself. Irresponsibly, the economic costs and political consequences of voting No were not made sufficiently clear to the electorate by the Government or the Yes side; they were blithely disregarded by their opponents. As a result many voters did not treat them with the importance they deserved. They believed a vote against the treaty would be relatively cost free, without affecting economic wellbeing, goodwill, and political perceptions of Ireland's reliability as an EU partner.
That one important decision leads to others, and that many consequences of such action may be unforeseen, are in fact central characteristics of political life. They have been fully at play in these international reactions to the Irish vote. Other EU governments will not reopen a document that took seven years to negotiate. They need legal certainty for next year's European Parliament elections and the appointment of the new European Commission next November. And they are impatient to implement the treaty so that the more efficient decision-making they believe it will encourage can deliver the greater public benefits they say will improve identification with the EU's system of government.
Ireland's referendum experience reveals substantial disenchantment and loss of trust in that system. But there is little coherence in the result, making it difficult for the Government to negotiate guarantees, assurances or opt-outs that could satisfy objections and encourage a change of mind. Clarifying the best course of action requires an intense public debate in coming months, in which political leadership has a crucial role to play.