Europe must still be called to account

The Euro-Taliban have rallied, the Jihad for Europe has commenced. My column of last week in which I urged people to repeat the No vote to the Nice Treaty saw them descending from Euro Bora.

Comdt John Palmer, of the Mushadheen, formerly a distinguished Guardian journalist, fired the first salvo on Thursday, and a large area of ground was cleared for him on this page, one suspects, by a Euro-mole in D'Olier Street. Ben Tora followed on Saturday, on the Letters page, which is where John Bruton, a Euro-elder now, engaged.

Curiously, Mustafa Brian Cowen issued a statement (actually a letter) signed by someone else. Next will it be a videotape couriered to al-Jazeerah television?

Their target was a timid observation on my part: that the Nice Treaty exacerbates the undemocratic character of the European project by loosening further the accountability of the Council of Ministers and that, as a consequence, we should vote No.

I argued also that because the text of the Nice Treaty is impenetrable we should reject it both on the grounds that we should not approve something we cannot readily understand and because this impenetrability is an expression of contempt by the Euro-Taliban for the European people.

I called for a No vote although I approve wholeheartedly of the enlargement process which, I acknowledge, is facilitated by the Nice Treaty. We have some leverage on the Euro-elite right now and we should exercise it to democratise the Union. Comdt Palmer said that because the Nice Treaty gives some additional powers to the European Parliament that takes care of the democratic issue. He referred to a decision of the EU heads of government in Seville two weeks ago where "a dramatic step" was taken towards greater openness by the Council of Ministers.

John Bruton said I was right to say there need be no trade-off between enlargement and greater democratic accountability in Europe because the European Convention will take care of the democratic issue. He said I should not complain about the impenetrability of the Nice Treaty because Irish case law interpreting the Irish Constitution is also impenetrable.

A CIVIL servant writing on behalf of Brian Cowen disagreed with John Bruton, who acknowledged there was an accountability problem. Brian Cowen thinks there is no problem and, if there is, it is a problem with national parliaments which fail to hold their own ministers accountable. He, too, took refuge in the Seville decision to open up Council meetings.

Ben Tora thought my proposal that ministers attending EU Council meetings be mandated by their national parliaments was a "logical somersault" and would create a "European constitutional monster". The tone of his letter suggested he was against that.

John Palmer is right: the Nice Treaty gives some minor additional powers to the European Parliament but continues to reserve from co-decision with the Parliament a whole raft of powers that remain the sole competence of the Council of Ministers.

He and others are right about a decision of the Seville summit to open up a realm of the Council of Ministers deliberations. But it refers only to those areas where co-decision applies, and the public and media are admitted only at the beginning and end of the process. The vast preponderance of Council business will remain secret, and the disposition of the Council is to keep it as secret as possible, as evidenced by its reluctance to disclose even its documents.

Of course, if would be better if there were Oireachtas scrutiny of the decisions and doings of the Council of Ministers, but even if there were it would be pretty marginal because the Council continues to do most of its business out of the glare of accountability.

Yes, of course, we could wait to see what the Convention of Europe will come up with on democratic accountability and hope for the best. But such expectations have been held out to us for years and nothing of significance has been done, and there is no reason to believe it will happen now unless there is a gun to the head of the Euro-Taliban.

AS for the argument about a "constitutional monster", democratic accountability has always been regarded by the Euro-Taliban as a constitutional monster and that is the problem. Anything that would give the people of Europe a real say over what happens in Europe is anathema to them. We'll all see this when the Convention on Europe does its business. The issue will arise then as to whether the new constitution for Europe should seek its democratic credentials by a plebiscite involving all the peoples of the European Union. "No way" will be the response of the Euro-Taliban and "No way" it will be.

As for John Bruton's claim that, as constitutional case law is impenetrable, we should not complain about EU treaties also being impenetrable. Isn't the difference that we are not asked to approve or disapprove impenetrable case law (actually constitutional case law is not impenetrable), whereas we are asked to approve impenetrable EU treaties?

We have a chance to puncture the arrogance of this Taliban elite now by voting against their grand plans. We should take it with relish.