Dutch voters yesterday delivered another body blow to the European Union's constitutional treaty with early indications showing they rejected it by 62 per cent to 38 per cent on a high turnout of 64 per cent.
Their vote registers severe disenchantment with European policies on employment, the euro and inflation and with the inept campaign by an unpopular government. Coming four days after the French electorate caused a political earthquake for the European elite, this result acutely poses the question: should ratification of the constitution by the 14 states still to decide on it proceed, be frozen or be abandoned?
The answer will be provided by the European Heads of Government in two weeks time, not by the voters of Ireland and the other 13 member-states. The constitution was negotiated and agreed by the EU's 25 governments collectively, to be ratified unanimously according to their respective procedures, by compulsory referendum in Ireland, for example, or by parliamentary passage. Nine states with a population of 220 million people have already agreed it, while two now have rejected it with compelling votes.
In theory, any decision on how to proceed should be reached unanimously. To abandon the constitution because of its rejection by France and the Netherlands would give these states and their variously dissatisfied electorates a veto over the process which would contradict the sovereign equality of the EU.
The European Council, including Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, will agree to abandon or freeze the outstanding ratifications. They will decide whether to allow parliaments and electorates to have their debates and make their decisions providing an overall perspective on the constitution. They will have to clarify in their own national minds how it could be renegotiated to meet the objections raised or whether it should be abandoned. The arguments for and against will accumulate across all the member-states in what is, after all, a collective endeavour between them.
The strong case against proceeding with the remaining ratifications is that they are no longer politically feasible. How can referendums go ahead in Ireland, the United Kingdom, Denmark or Poland when there is no certainty about the outcome? The No vote would be strengthened by these results and weakened by more effective campaigning from the Yes side in each of these states. At the end of the process, would the Taoiseach be weakened by arguing that by risking the political capital involved in a second referendum to satisfy concessions to France and the Netherlands in the run-up to a general election?
These issues will be debated throughout Ireland and the EU over the next two weeks. In the wake of the Nice Treaty referendums, the first No and the second Yes, the Taoiseach will be the first person to know that he will have a difficulty proposing a referendum on a constitution with questionable status.