The Treaty of Amsterdam is becoming better known to the electorate as a result of publicity from the Referendum Commission, campaigning by political parties, interest and pressure groups and a higher profile in the national and local media. Today this newspaper publishes a supplement on the treaty which is part explanatory, part analytical and part advocacy, and which it is hoped will be of benefit to voters during the campaign. It is certainly not before time that this should be so. Although the treaty lacks the singular, central focus of its predecessors on which referendums have been held it consolidates deeper processes of European integration by developing the EU's competences in several crucial and, in the opinion of this newspaper, largely acceptable ways. The constitutional effect of passing it will be to transfer sovereignty irrevocably from a national to a pooled basis in such a way as to reinforce the supremacy of European over Irish law in designated areas. Voters must bear in mind that much of the dynamism of European integration arises from the judiciable nature of what may appear to be simple or innocuous changes to the treaties. The treaty's opening article says it "marks a new stage in the process of creating an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe". The failure to agree on new decision-making rules to accommodate a much larger number of member-states makes it certain that another treaty revision will be held in four or five years. The subject matter suffers from an image of remoteness from everyday concerns which is contradicted by exposure to its practical content. In fact the treaty was negotiated explicitly to concentrate on issues of immediate relevance to citizens of the member-states, such as employment, fundamental rights, crime and drug trafficking, environmental policy, social and gender equality and the development of more effective means to share foreign policy-making.
Having been exposed more comprehensively to what has been agreed voters will have to decide whether too much, too little or just about enough has been achieved by the national negotiators, who worked within the constraints of unanimity, but subject to their own public opinion. It will also be necessary to balance progress in some spheres against stalemate in others when voters choose whether to vote Yes or No on May 22nd. An image of complexity is also attached to the referendum. Certainly it is deserved if attention is focused only on the technical legal text in which intergovernmental agreements are written. But the real issues are quite capable of being expressed politically and understood readily easily by voters. It is necessary to work at it, as with all serious political matters, but this, after all, is the price of democracy. The Referendum Commission is doing valuable work by setting out the issues involved in the referendum on the Belfast Agreement and on the Amsterdam Treaty, both of which, unfortunately for good democratic practice, are to be held on the same day. While the text of the Belfast Agreement is being circulated to all households, it is regrettable that a similar level of detail is not being provided on the Amsterdam Treaty.