Putting neutrality into the Constitution would give power to the people when it comes to future foreign policy military issues, argues Brendan Howlin
The reasons the Nice Treaty referendum was defeated last year are many and complex. Some are quantifiable while others are not. But foreign policy issues and, in particular, concerns about the possible erosion of our policy of military neutrality certainly were a significant factor.
It is true to say that foreign policy issues were not a central part of the treaty. The establishment of the Rapid Reaction Force was contained in the Amsterdam Treaty, passed by the Irish people.
But in addressing Nice, the people expressed a sense of concern about the evolution of the European foreign and security policy and its implications for our military neutrality.
If a second Nice referendum is to have any prospect of success, the Government must indicate that it has listened to the will of the people, expressed in the first referendum, and respond accordingly. If that is done, it will be legitimate to ask the people once again to support a treaty whose primary purpose is to facilitate enlargement of the EU, a process supported by almost all the participants in the Forum on Europe.
Clearly, neutrality is an issue, but not the only one. The Labour Party believes that addressing what has been described as the democratic deficit is equally important. It is this lack of scrutiny of EU proposals and positions taken on them by Irish ministers that contributes to the sense of lost control that sections of the people now feel about European integration. That is why we will be pushing the Government to enact our European Union Bill, published last year, to address this issue. Accountability has to be pursued on a legislative basis, not simply by changes to Dáil standing orders.
The Taoiseach's remarks over the weekend must be of some concern to those who wish to see the Nice Treaty passed. The tone of a second campaign is highly important. People want to be listened to, not lectured at.
Our draft amendment would ensure that Ireland could not be party to a mutual defence obligation. The only way that that could be overturned would be if the people decided to do so by way of referendum.
The two declarations published at Seville are indeed welcome. In particular, the clarification by our European partners of their interpretation of existing European treaties is significant.
But I believe that the Irish people, and certainly the participants at the Forum on Europe, are looking for more. Introducing the second interim report, the chairman of the forum, Senator Maurice Hayes, said: "Forum members are also seeking reassurances from the Government that there is no plan to enter any military alliance for mutual defence, that it is not going to be a party to any plans to develop a European army, and that it would not move from these positions without the express approval of the Irish people."
This is the issue the Government is seeking to address in its national declaration. But we are immediately on thin ice here. If there have been concerns about the trustworthiness of the Government's approach to the development of foreign policy, it has been well founded.
Fianna Fáil's cynical act of promising a referendum on membership of NATO's Partnership for Peace, but then abandoning the proposal on coming to office, seriously undermines the credibility of the declarations they are now promoting. So much so, in fact, that the ultimate losers may prove to be the citizens of eastern Europe who seek early and speedy accession to the European Union.
It's not that the people are opposed to Irish participation in peacekeeping and even peace-making missions. But they know there are other European states more comfortable with the concept of a European army which want to move in that direction.
The attraction of a referendum on neutrality is that it puts the power to decide Ireland's future foreign policy in respect of military alliances firmly into the hands of the people. They and they only could sanction membership of any military alliance.
This proposal, put on the same day as a second Nice referendum, in addition to some of the measures I have already outlined, would fundamentally alter the context in which the second referendum has been put. It would go, in Labour's view, a considerable way to increasing the prospects of that referendum being passed.
The objections to our proposal will be that it will transfer foreign policy into the hands of the courts, not the Oireachtas.
Labour doesn't accept that view. Foreign policy is already judiciable. Any aspect of policy that offends the Constitution or existing law can be determined in the courts, and foreign policy is no exception to that rule.
Moreover, isn't it about time that we gave an absolute definition to the concept of neutrality - a concept that has become so amorphous as to hinder, not help, debate? Our amendment cannot provide a full definition of the potential of our neutrality, but it will serve as a useful bedrock.
Brendan Howlin is deputy leader of the Labour Party and head of the party's delegation to the National Forum on Europe