Daily Telegraph

www.dailytelegraph.com/opinion

Ireland's love affair with Europe starts to unravel

2001.05.04

By Daniel Hannan

TALK in Brussels is beginning to turn to the poll on June 7. Not the British election, but Ireland's referendum on the Nice Treaty. The Irish are alone in the EU in being offered a direct say. If they vote "no", the entire deal will need to be re-negotiated - a prospect that, after the ill-tempered scrapping that accompanied the last summit, fills Eurocrats with horror.

The betting is still on a "yes" vote, but some of the more perceptive Brussels observers are becoming edgy. It is true that the Irish have so far been happy to ratify any treaty put in front of them; but each time they have done so by a smaller margin. And this time, scepticism is coming from unexpected quarters.

"This is one of the weakest negotiating outcomes achieved by an Irish government since Ireland joined the EU," said John Bruton, the leader of the opposition, on reading the treaty. Jim O'Keefe, Fine Gael's foreign affairs spokesman, agreed: "No matter how one dresses it up, there is now a permanent shift in the balance of power away from the smaller states such as ourselves." Labour's leader, Ruari Quinn, was blunter: "It was a disaster."

All these men may yet appear on "yes" platforms: such, alas, is the way of European politics. But it is hard to imagine that they or other Europhiles will muster much enthusiasm for the campaign. As one Irish MEP told me: "If they think I'm getting off my arse for this one, they can think again."

Opponents of the treaty have no such doubts. They may be motivated by many different things, but at least they are motivated. Some are worried about the planned European army, which they see as a threat to Ireland's neutrality. Others share the Vatican's concerns about the anti-family aspects of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Still others, including Sinn Fein, see the whole process as a threat to Irish sovereignty.

To which the "yes" campaign replies that, with all its faults, Nice is needed to pave the way for eastward enlargement. Whether or not this is actually true, it is a highly dangerous line to take. EU expansion is one of those issues that, in most member states, divides the pays legal from the pays real. In my own constituency, voters tend to associate enlargement with immigration and higher taxes; I should be surprised if Kerrymen see things all that differently from Kentishmen.

The trouble for Irish Europhiles is that, like their British counterparts, they have never honestly made the case for political integration. Instead, they have concentrated on the economic advantages of EU membership. To be fair, this is rather easier in Ireland than in Britain: in previous referendums, the "yes" campaign has always been able to clinch the result by reminding voters that they get six pounds back from Brussels for every pound they pay in.

But that argument has an obvious flip-side. This time, voters are being asked to endorse a treaty that would turn Ireland into a net contributor. As another Irish Europhile put it: "For 30 years, we've been telling people to vote 'yes' for the money. Do you now blame them for not seeing the other benefits?"

The paradox is that the impact of these Brussels subsidies has been exaggerated. Ireland's prosperity owes little to EU grants, which tend to go into those parts of the economy that are most sluggish, such as agriculture. Its boom was bred at home, by radical tax cuts out of a well-educated workforce.

It is true that Ireland has done well out of the EU - but not in the way that is usually meant. The greatest benefits have not been economic, but diplomatic. Before 1973, Ireland's international relations tended to focus disproportionately, although perhaps understandably, on its dealings with the United Kingdom. Irish foreign policy was, if not exactly anti-British, at least predicated on a desire to show that Irish interests could diverge from its neighbour's.

Twenty-eight years of sitting on equal terms with Britain around the EU table have broadened Ireland's horizons. The republic now has a fully developed portfolio of European interests, and will cheerfully side with the United Kingdom when the objectives of the two states coincide. If nothing else, European integration has worked wonders for Anglo-Irish relations.

But this new assertiveness has not gone down well in Brussels. Many continental politicians persist in the belief that the republic's prosperity is really thanks to them, and resent what they see as Ireland's ingratitude. In particular, they believe - quite wrongly - that the Irish have used EU money to fund the tax cuts that now give them a competitive edge.

Matters came to a head two months ago, when the EU brusquely ordered Ireland to raise its tax rates. The Irish finance minister, Charlie McCreevy, was understandably cross: Ireland is running a 4.7 per cent budget surplus, and tax cuts are an important part of his anti-inflation strategy. But his fellow finance ministers were unmoved by the argument that he knew more about the Irish economy than they did. According to senior Eurocrats, it was his attitude, rather than what he actually said, that irritated them.

They would not have minded so much, say insiders, if he had been prepared to ham up the role of the grateful Irish supplicant: "Listen, boys, could ye cut me some slack on this one? I'm after doing a deal with the trade unions." But Mr McCreevy, well aware that he had a better track record than most of his European colleagues, was in no mood to grovel.

Nor were his countrymen. The EU's hectoring caused justifiable fury in Ireland. "Outrageous attempt to usurp Irish sovereignty" was the headline over one Irish Examiner leader. There was a widespread suspicion that the ticking-off was motivated, not by a concern for euro- zone stability, but by resentment of Ireland's tax rates.

It is into this heated atmosphere that the referendum campaign is being launched. That is why it is so hard to predict the result. In the privacy of the polling booth, many voters may simply wish to register their view that the EU is getting too big for its boots. As a friend in Dublin put it: "We didn't fight off the might of the British Empire just so that we could be bossed around by the Belgians."

Daniel Hannan is a Conservative MEP for South-East England

There is NO CopyRight on this document, which is one of many 1,000s of items freely available on http://www.SilentMajority.co.UK [some 8Mbs.] & 10s of 1,000s of items on The SilentMajority CD [with over 40Mbs.] which contains the entire web site, 1,000s of apposite quotations, Articles, Speeches, ArtWork, & The FULL text of The EU Treaties, Several Related Books, The British Constitution, The American Constitution & Numerous related Items.
SilentMajority nor any associate thereof does NOT vouch for the veracity of the documents hosted on its site or CD nor any foreign language documents thereon & advises you consult your own solicitor on legal details as we do not accept liability for nor presume to give legal advice ourselves.
For a copy of the CD please mail payment of £20.00 for UK deliver or £25.00 for ALL other Countries payable to:
Greg Lance – Watkins,
Glance Back Books,
17 Upper Church Street,
CHEPSTOW,
NP16 5EX
Monmouthshire,
GREAT BRITAIN
For delivery of 2 x CDs
one for your own use
and one for on selling or donation to an individual of influence (media, politician, activist etc.)

IF YOU wish to use the Material Above, which is freely provided
Please have the Courtesy to Print It out in its entirety from start to finish with NO alterations, as displayed.
To This Point