Debate on EU Constitution

Madam, - Robert Ballagh (April 13th) claims that "the proposed EU Constitution would abolish nearly 70 existing national vetoes…

Madam, - Robert Ballagh (April 13th) claims that "the proposed EU Constitution would abolish nearly 70 existing national vetoes and give those as extra powers to the EU". A frightening prospect, I agree; but, fortunately for all of us, one that is not in fact true.

Under the proposed European Constitution, some legislative areas will be moved from a system of unanimity in Council to qualified majority voting (QMV). These are not extra powers given to the EU; rather they are areas of competence that have already been transferred to the EU by the Irish people in referendums on past treaties. These areas will be moved from unanimity simply because they can be more efficiently and effectively dealt with using QMV.

Many of the areas concerned are those which were previously in the Justice and Home Affairs pillar, and the proposed changes will mean reduced cross-border crime (including money-laundering, drug-trafficking and sexual exploitation of women and children) and increased security for EU citizens.

The European Commission has the right of initiative, but it certainly does not have a monopoly of power over the legislative process - a process consisting of, along with the Commission, the directly elected European Parliament and the Council of Ministers, which consists of directly elected representatives of all the national governments. It is obvious from its nature and composition that the Council of Ministers is of course "irremovable as a group".

READ MORE

However, the Ministers can be removed individually - by the citizens of their member-states in a general election.

Does Mr Ballagh propose that somebody should have the power to remove other countries' government Ministers? If so, to whom does he propose this almighty power be given? The European Constitution also proposes to greatly increase the power and role of the directly elected European Parliament in the legislative process.

As for Mr Ballagh's scoff at the yellow card system proposed in the Constitution, this not only increases the power of national parliaments in the decision-making process, it will force our own Oireachtas to examine its practices and pay greater attention to its analysis and implementation of European legislation. All member-state national parliaments will have the opportunity to further the European decision-making process.

The proposed European Constitution is the consolidation into one document of the five individual treaties that the Irish people have already endorsed. However, it goes further than mere consolidation, as it provides a more transparent and democratic system of open decision-making for a unique political union of member-states represented in the Council of Ministers, and of individual citizens represented in the European Parliament.

Not only is it a solution to Europe's fractious nationalist past, but it has the potential to civilise globalisation by a worldwide projection of European values in contrast to the United States' neo-conservative global agenda.

We have heard many myths in relation to the European Union; we in the European Movement are calling for an honest and rational debate in advance of the forthcoming referendum. We hope Mr Ballagh and other members of the "No" side heed our call before putting pen to paper. - Yours, etc.,

RUAIRI QUINN TD, Chairperson, European Movement Ireland, Leinster House, Dublin 2.

Madam, - While I am no admirer of Sinn Féin - quite the contrary - I beg to disagree with Proinsias De Rossa who criticises them for not seeking to amend the proposed European Constitution.

What is the point of seeking to amend a fundamentally flawed document proposed by a fundamentally flawed, undemocratic organisation? Rather, it is better to vote the constitution down in the coming referendum and hope that this time the voice of the people will be respected. - Yours, etc.,

FRANK BARR, Glasnevin Woods, Ballyboggan Road, Dublin 11.