Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

The road from Dublin to Lisbon is strewn with obstacles. The Irish government has begun reconnoitring the terrain and examining the nature of those obstructions. In the coming months, we will see a lot of huffing and puffing, pushing and pulling as Irish politicians and those in other countries try to pass the blockage that has stopped the Lisbon treaty becoming law. But to me they still seem insurmountable.

I wonder if the foreign secretary agrees. Speaking on a visit to Dublin, David Miliband said," There can be no question of bulldozing or bullying the Irish people. There is respect for the integrity of their vote. The situation over Lisbon creates an opportunity - an opportunity to clarify and define the role of the EU in the modern world."

He then talked about the need to build a global role for the EU in combating climate change, promoting democracy and security beyond its own borders. He ends up saying, "We must put function and purpose before institutions. We must take the opportunity to define the function and purpose of the EU with clarity and drive."

Which doesn't sound to me like he's backing the majority view among EU leaders that, somehow the Irish must vote again.

The Irish government is doing its homework before its head-scratching. It has just published the result of a big opinion poll, which was backed up by focus groups. It found that the Irish on the whole thought the EU a good thing (70 %, and even 63 % of no voters) and that the young and the less well off were most strongly against the treaty.

There was a strong frustration at the difficulty of understanding the document. While 78% of those voted correctly knew that Ireland, along with other countries, would lose a commissioner for five years out of every 15, 38% thought that the treaty would introduce conscription into an EU army, which is fantasy.

A team of Irish civil servants has been to Denmark to talk to officials about their opt-outs following a No to the Maastricht treaty. The survey gently hints at the areas where the Irish government might fruitfully seek opt-outs or statements of clarification. They are:

- Retaining military neutrality
- Preventing excessive EU regulation
- Retaining full control over abortion laws
- Retaining the commissioner.

There is no doubt other EU leaders would happily sign up to warm words on the first three, and many wouldn't mind back-tracking and keeping their own commissioner even if it means an inelegantly swollen commission.

But I seriously wonder if this would be enough to tempt the Irish government into a second referendum.

Perhaps the report's most interesting observation is that "In the focus groups there was a very general feeling that the Irish people were going to be asked to vote again, sooner or later, whether on the same or on a revised document. Although many had voted 'No' simply through lack of understanding, and some were prepared to consider changing their minds if the same document were presented with clearer explanations, the general consensus at the time, was that if presented unchanged, it could result in an even more negative result. 'No' voters in particular often expressed offence at the idea that their decision would not be respected."

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?