No to Nice has been good for democracy in the EU, which must now take notice of people's concerns, writes Nuala Ahern MEP
The No vote on the Nice treaty shook the establishment in Dublin and Brussels in June last year. Both the Brussels elite and European capitals realised that the vote signalled a refusal by the rank and file to accept deals done behind closed doors which ignored ordinary people's concerns. Something had to be done to renew the legitimacy of the process of treaty-making.
Proposals for a convention on the future of Europe were to hand. They had been endorsed by the European Parliament and were hastily dusted down and put in place by the European Council at Laekin last December.
The Laekin Declaration has revolutionised the way treaties are made. The process is now open to public scrutiny and is engaged in by parliamentarians from the member-states and by delegates from the European Parliament. This is a huge gain which should make it much more difficult to create treaties that are incomprehensible, abstract and dysfunctional.
The Treaty of Nice is seriously flawed. It removes an important area of legitimacy of the European Union, namely the automatic right to a Commissioner from all member-states. Although we are told that Ireland will take its turn in losing its commissioner along with all other member-states, the loss of a commissioner is clearly more important to small states than large ones which have strong voting rights in the Council of Ministers.
It would be inconceivable for one of the states in the US to be told that they could only be represented in the Senate for three-quarters of the time because there would be too many senators otherwise.
The loss of our automatic right to a commissioner may seem a distant prospect at present - but so was the loss of duty-free when an Irish government signed up to that 10 years before it happened. It was supposed to herald greater tax harmonisation, but so far it is simply an own goal in the tax harmonisation package.
The new voting system proposed under Nice makes it more complicated - rather than less - to reach a decision. The Commission in Brussels should be encouraged by the vehemence of the rejection of a rotating commissioner. Plainly it does matter to people they are fully represented.
We are beginning to see chinks of light - even TV cameras are appearing in the Council of Ministers. The old order of concealment and dissimulation is under threat. Habits more suited to a Napoleonic style of government cannot survive in the 21st century. We are, however, far from a more open and functional system yet.
The pro-nuclear policies of the EU are a cause for utmost concern. It's quite clear that any EU common defence would have a nuclear weapons component, given the French and British nuclear deterrents.
Comments recently by José María Gil Robles Gil Delgado, former president of the European Parliament and current international president of the European Movement, dramatically lifted the lid on a possible future EU common defence scenario when he stated that "the \ briefcase must come over to the president of the European Commission".
Energy Commissioner Loyola de Palacio is preparing directives which seek to promote nuclear technology in all member-states. Ireland needs to be much more active in opposing this together with other non-nuclear states.
The debate has shifted from the treaty itself to more general issues such as enlargement. The Nice Treaty is actually about how Europe will function after the accession of 10 or more new countries in central and eastern Europe. Up to five new members can be accepted without Nice. After that, further enlargement of the EU is legally possible through individual accession treaties.
However, another No vote may make the process more difficult politically in some member-states. Ireland will not be responsible for this, but may be blamed if it happens.
There are great uncertainties here and it is unfair not to acknowledge this. Those whose sympathies lie with people in central Europe struggling to emerge from the wreckage of communism may feel that this uncertainty is too high a price to pay.
But if people in France or Germany had voted No to Nice it is inconceivable that their government would go cap in hand to the European Council and promise to do better next time! We have already given our answer to Nice and it should be respected. On these grounds alone we should vote No again.
The dizzy pace of European treaties has been driven by events in eastern Europe that go beyond normal oppositional politics and have meant a paradigm change for the EU. It can no longer be a centralising system.
We need to meet this challenge honestly and openly. Nice is not good enough. It is time to create an open and accountable system to fulfil the desires and aspirations of all European citizens.
Nuala Ahern is Green MEP for Leinster