A hot topic in Brussels but not in the election: Deaglán de Bréadún, Political Correspondent, assesses the positions of the parties on the constitutional treaty
It's the forgotten treaty, at least in the Irish context. Health, housing, taxation, traffic: these are the issues that catch the imagination of public and politicians in the run-up to the general election. But a major European constitutional document with significant implications for everyone's future hardly rates a mention.
The treaty establishing a constitution for Europe, also known as the EU constitution, has been on the back-burner since the electorates in France and the Netherlands shocked the political classes throughout the continent by voting No in two referendums on May 29th and June 1st, 2005.
However, 18 other member states have gone through the ratification procedure, resulting in a political stalemate which Germany's European presidency, headed by chancellor Angela Merkel, has pledged to resolve.
Ireland has not yet ratified the treaty and no date has been set for a referendum. Since it is bound to be an issue for the incoming government, The Irish Timessent a list of questions to the various parties seeking to clarify their respective positions.
Given Taoiseach Bertie Ahern's role in securing agreement on the text at the Brussels Summit of June 2004, it is hardly surprising that Fianna Fáil sees "no realistic alternative to the balance and substance of the text as agreed under Ireland's presidency". The main governing party now accepts that "some changes will have to be considered with a view to helping our EU partners with difficulties" but stresses that these "should not affect the essential balance and substance of the current text".
Likewise with Fianna Fáil's Coalition partners, the Progressive Democrats, who warn that changing the text "could lead to an unravelling of a delicate balancing act and to an inevitable process of cherry-picking".
Fine Gael spokesman on foreign affairs Bernard Allen also opposes any moves to "cherry-pick" the treaty because "what looks like a cherry to one member-state might resemble a lemon to another". But adding protocols to allay specific concerns, as happened with Ireland and the Nice Treaty, "could be considered". Labour's spokesman on European affairs, Joe Costello, takes a similar view: "Additions could be made by way of declarations or legally binding protocols that would clarify and expand on the existing text to address the specific concerns of pro-EU voters."
Green Party foreign affairs spokesman John Gormley says they "will not take a definitive position on the European Constitution until such time as we are sure of the exact content of the document being put to the Irish people".
The Greens favour removing Part III of the current text. "This deals with the policies of the Union on all levels," says Gormley. "We do not see it as being appropriate that a policy-based document should form part of a constitution." In addition, a new convention, along the lines of the one which drafted the treaty in the first place, should now be set up to renegotiate the document.
The national chairwoman of Sinn Féin, Mary Lou McDonald MEP, is an outright opponent of the treaty. "Sinn Féin has been opposed to the proposed EU constitution since its publication," she says, adding that it is "bad for Ireland, bad for the EU and bad for the wider world".
No amount of tinkering or revision will redeem the document in Sinn Féin's eyes: "The EU constitution was democratically rejected by the electorates of France and the Netherlands. It is effectively dead. To suggest that its text is somehow retrievable after these democratic votes simply demonstrates the arrogance of the European political elites."
Socialist Party TD Joe Higgins is also solidly opposed to the treaty, regarding it as "a consolidation of all the treaties and deals that went before, underwriting the idea of the EU as another capitalist world bloc". Since his party regards the EU as a capitalist club, "no modification of the current proposed constitution would meet our objections".
There is mixed reaction to the "mini-treaty" idea suggested by French interior minister and presidential candidate Nicolas Sarkozy. Whereas Fianna Fáil is sticking with the current draft, the PDs are prepared to suspend judgment until they see the text of any such document. Fine Gael wants the focus to remain very firmly on adopting the current draft, although "a less ambitious goal such as the adoption of a 'mini-treaty' may be necessary in the future".
Labour's Joe Costello refuses to entertain the Sarkozy plan because "a mini-treaty will mean a mini-Europe, when what we need is a more democratic and socially engaged and effective Europe". John Gormley says the Greens are "suspicious of Mr Sarkozy's motives", accusing the French politician of seeking to "bypass democracy".
Mary Lou McDonald is also wary of the Sarkozy plan, commenting that Sinn Féin will "form a view of an actual text rather than hypothetical proposals made by politicians in the midst of domestic electoral campaigns". Joe Higgins, meanwhile, "would have no confidence whatever in either Merkel or Sarkozy, both right-wing political agents of big business interests".
From their different standpoints, Fine Gael and Sinn Féin are both critical of the attendance by Minister of State for European Affairs Noel Treacy at a meeting in Madrid on January 26th with the 18 states that have already completed the ratification procedure. "A meeting that takes place without representation from France, the Netherlands or Britain is not going to be the one that hammers out a deal," says Bernard Allen.
Mary Lou McDonald says the Minister demonstrated "his abject disregard for the democratic will of the electorate of the 26 counties", since the treaty still has not been ratified here. John Gormley says "the Government should make it clear that the wishes of the French and Dutch electorates will be respected".
However, Labour's Joe Costello is, for once, in agreement with Fianna Fáil and the PDs that Treacy was right to attend: "It was a clear signal that all the main political parties in Ireland that played a major role in negotiating and finalising the treaty want to proceed to its ratification."
Asked if any revised treaty should be put to a vote of the people, Fine Gael's Allen replies: "Any treaty which amends our Constitution must be put to a referendum, so if any future revised treaty has this impact then a referendum must take place. Other changes, which do not entail amending the Constitution, can take place without referendum."
The Greens favour putting a substantially altered treaty to the people, both in Ireland and throughout the EU, to be decided by what Gormley calls "a double majority". Higgins says his party "would absolutely insist that if any modified constitution were brought forward it should be put to a referendum".
Past experience suggests that the real public debate will only begin after a referendum is called. The responses so far from the various parties suggests that any document likely to emerge will have the support of Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, Labour and the PDs, with Sinn Féin and the Socialist Party opposed.
The Greens are holding their fire and it will be worth watching to see whether their presence or otherwise in government has any influence on their stance.
The full text of the answers from the different parties is available at http://www.ireland.com/focus/2007/euconstitution/index.html