Ruairí Quinnbelieves the treaty should replace the EU constitution, Mary Lou McDonalddisagrees.
FOR
The treaty marks the conclusion of a process and
Ruairí Quinnbelieves voters should endorse
the outcome
The European Union is the most successful peace project in the history of humanity and it now has the potential to become much more.
A continent that went to war against itself in nearly every generation for the last 150 years, is now finally at peace. Nations such as France and Germany abandoned war against each other and divided societies such as Portugal, Spain and Greece, have replaced fascist dictatorship with democracy.
The historian Eric Hobsbawm described the 20th century as the "age of extremes". For him, it started in 1914 and ended with the collapse of communism in 1989. The reunification of Germany opened the way for the reconnection of the continent of Europe. When the Iron Curtain finally melted against the heat of freedom, old nation states such as Hungary, Estonia, Poland and Slovenia had to learn again the workings of democracy and the mechanisms of a market economy.
It has been an extraordinary European journey. Out of the ashes of 1945, the six founding states lit the beacon of the European project which 12 years later became the Treaty of Rome.
The European Economic Community was, from the beginning, much more than a Free Trade Area. The genius of the founders lay in their recognition that while people may work in markets they live in communities. The creation of the European Commission was the guarantee that big nation states could not bully small ones.
Today, the European Union is the most successful model of regional integration in the world.
The Lisbon reform treaty completes a process of reform which began in 1990. When it was clear that the union would rapidly expand it became obvious that the decision-making system for a group of 10 or 12 nation states would not be effective or efficient for a union of up to 30 members.
A lot of time and indeed European introspection has been devoted to this matter.
This Lisbon reform treaty is the best compromise that could be obtained. In my view, it brings to an end the debate about the structure and future of the European Union.
In that context it should be noted that the idealistic European Federalists, the bête noire of the British tabloid press, have lost out. Europe will not become a Super State. Instead its unique constitutional combination of inter-governmental agreements and multinational institutions will enable the union to provide effective decisions.
As the period of introspection within Europe is over, its conclusions could not have come at a better time, because the issues which now confront every European citizen today, recognise no frontiers.
Climate change, globalisation, energy security, world trade, migration and international crime, including human trafficking, are the realities which concern Europeans.
The voice of the European Union will speak louder in international talks than any combination of European nation states. When the European Council of Ministers and the European Parliament jointly agree to a policy proposal, then the European Union can project that proposal on to the world's stage with authority.
The European Union is not, and will not be in the future, a Super State. But it is already becoming a "Super Influence". It has the capacity to promote the values which have made us strong at home - peace, freedom, democracy, solidarity, equality, a successful economy, the protection of our environment and cultural heritage across the union.
The main provisions of the Lisbon reform treaty will clarify our decision making. The new office of the president of the Council of Ministers will replace the current system of the six-month rotating presidency of the council. With 27 members, continuity and focus was not possible.
The new president, elected by the heads of government for a maximum of five years, will give leadership in promoting policies which have been agreed by the Council of Ministers.
The new post of the political high level representative or "European Secretary" will enable a European politician to speak on our behalf when articulating agreed policies to the rest of the world.
The incorporation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights into the treaty further enhances European values, protects our people and strengthens the cohesion of the union.
There is also recognition that the balance between national parliaments and European institutions must be restructured. The commission, the body that initiates legislative proposals, must now simultaneously inform national parliaments, the European Parliament and the European Council of Ministers.
If a sufficient number of national parliaments believe that the commission has intruded into the area of national competence then, a "yellow card" process can be invoked.
The commission will be required to rethink its proposal so as not to contravene subsidiarity, the policy that decisions should be taken as close as possible to those whom they affect - one of the fundamental principles of the European Union.
I belong to that first generation of European citizens who grew up, fortunate in the prospect that I would never have to face a European war in which I could become a combatant.
For my children, and their children, the global dimension is different. The prospect, now, of a European war is inconceivable. But the reality of global challenges confronts us all every day.
Climate change, globalisation, migration and social justice are the new agenda with which we have to grapple. The combined strength and authority of the European Union acting together is the new instrument which my parents or I never had as citizens growing up in the Republic of Ireland.
The young generation's ability to change the world, in which they will grow old, will be enhanced by the ratification of the Lisbon reform treaty. It will bring together, in a unique way, the strength of a European community of nations to effectively pool their sovereignty in agreed areas of action. Increasingly, it is the global stage where that action is needed.
[ www.allianceforeurope.orgOpens in new window ]
AGAINST
Mary Lou McDonaldargues that it amounts to the
biggest transfer of power from the people to Brussels and should be
rejected
Ireland's place is within Europe. Many benefits have come as a result of our membership of the European Union and as an MEP, I support EU and other Europe-wide measures that are in Ireland's interests. But I am not afraid to stand up against EU measures that are damaging to Ireland's interests and have strongly opposed moves towards a federalised EU dominated by the larger states.
In 2005 the people of the Netherlands and France rejected the EU constitution. In the time since, EU leaders have sought a way of breathing life back into the rejected EU constitution. That is what they are doing today in Lisbon.
Angela Merkel, German chancellor and primary mover behind the new treaty, stated: "The substance of the constitution is preserved. That is a fact."
The cosmetic changes made to the constitution were motivated by a desire to avoid referendums in member states. Giuliano Amato, vice-chairman of the convention which drew up the EU constitution, observed: "The good thing about not calling it a constitution is that no one can ask for a referendum on it".
While the term constitution has been jettisoned, the "innovations" contained in the constitution have been kept. At the moment we are the only state to have a referendum. This is a big responsibility.
The proponents of the treaty have started their campaign on a negative note. Opposition to the treaty, they claim, is "isolationist" and would make us a "laughing stock". The people of France and the Netherlands showed no signs of such an inferiority complex. They had a mature debate and took their democratic decision. The need for Ireland to have its place at the EU table is obvious. We must use that place positively. Our international reputation is not so brittle that we must always act as "yes men" to preserve it even when the best course of action is to say no.
European leaders vowed that the new treaty would address the EU's democratic deficit. They have failed to deliver. The Lisbon treaty contains the most substantial transfer of powers from member states to the European council and commission to date. More than 60 areas will no longer be decided by consensus but by majority voting.
These include immigration, structural funds, judicial and police co-operation, economic policy guidelines for eurozone members and initiatives of the new foreign minister. The relentless centralising of power, feeding a burgeoning bureaucracy, undermines good governance and copperfastens the dominance of the larger states.
It removes our ability democratically to reject laws that are not in our interests and places an unbridgeable gulf between citizens and the decision-making processes which affect them.
The meagre provisions in the Lisbon treaty aimed at parliaments in member states are no compensation for this onward march to EU centralised power.
The new passerelle, or escalator clauses, are of huge concern. These will allow for decision making in the council to be altered from unanimity to qualified majority in common foreign and security policy matters and judicial co-operation in criminal matters, without recourse to parliaments or referendums.
The EU Commission makes no secret of its desire to decide on matters relating to corporation tax. There is growing concern that powers contained in both the Nice and Lisbon treaties could assist them in doing this.
The erosion of Irish military neutrality and the militarisation of the EU over the last decade is there for all to see. At EU level we see the incremental development of an EU army, in all but name, at home the use of Shannon airport by US troops on their way to wage war in Iraq. The Government did not even try to secure a specific article explicitly recognising the rights and duties of neutral states within the union. EU military ambition - to be a global player acting in concert with Nato - is clearly set out in the treaty. The treaty requires member states to progressively "improve military capabilities". This will have a financial cost. At a time when our public services are crying out for investment, do we really want our tax revenue to be spent in such a manner?
EU economies must be competitive. But competitiveness must not be secured at the cost of environmental sustainability or social cohesion. Unfortunately this is precisely the direction of current EU economic policy, advancing the agenda of deregulation, privatisation and low public spending.
Social Europe has been abandoned and the market is now king.
The implication of such policies is growing inequality, a race to the bottom for wages and workers' rights and the further sale of State assets with the same consequences as we have seen with Aer Lingus and Eircom. Ratifying the Lisbon treaty will simply serve to accelerate this economic agenda.
And this is not a case of scaremongering. When Sinn Féin and the whole of the farming industry demanded that Minister for Agriculture Mary Coughlan ban Brazilian beef as it does not comply with EU standards, the Minister said the banning of Brazilian beef was "a matter for the European Commission".
There was a similar response from the Taoiseach when it came to protecting jobs in Irish Ferries.
The Lisbon treaty does not advance the interests of the Irish people, the European Union or the developing world. Sinn Féin is calling on everyone on this island who will have a vote to come out and oppose this treaty.
Mary Lou McDonald is Sinn Féin national chairwoman and the party's MEP for Dublin.