PES Manifesto

Yohann Abiven: In France, being treated of ... Lisbon is not really a compliment!

Published Monday, March 3, 2008 at 14:30
by yoan.abiven in European democracy & diversity (643 views and 4 comments)

At long last, France has joined the group of sensible nations to have ratified the Lisbon treaty!

This time though, it chose not to risk asking the French people either through a vote or a referendum. Thus President Sarkozy kept his electoral promise of choosing to go the parliamentary way. And as if nothing had changed since the French rejection of the constitutional treaty in 2005, all the 'narrow-minded Frenchies' of back then rose up in arms more or less exactly as last time. The campaign for the French presidential elections and the 'forced' bipartisanship of that particular moment in time had silenced them for a while.

The Socialist Party lost itself in its own contradictions, thereby illustrating the old saying that if there is no solution, then maybe there is no problem. This may account for the rebirth of a true political centre in France. The Left has at least remained united on one thing: it called for a new referendum, some of its members so that they can relive the great feeling of having said yes the first time, the others, of having said no, I guess, but beyond that all Socialists have remained good friends and comrades.

The tricky thing about this whole story is that those in favour of a referendum are not totally wrong from the perspective of a good democratic functioning. Not for the sake of saying that the will of the people should prevail at all costs that 'what the people has undone, only the people can redo': to take a French example, our own Constitution of 1958 was adopted through a referendum. But the very same constitution does not allow the people to have any other say in the matter as it can only be amended by Parliament, as stipulated by Article 89. Our French République simply considers that referendums and parliamentary votes are the legal ways to legislate. But beyond these French constitutional subtleties, what should really make us wary is the gap between the real people and the real elites. Though referenda and parliamentary votes are on equal footing in the decision-making process, there is nonetheless a huge difference whether you decide to use one or the other. This should make us reflect.

For a democracy to be alive there is no need for the people and their representatives to be exactly on the same wave-length on everything, for what would be the point of having a system of representation of the people? However, there should also not be such a huge gap between the governing and the governed either, because then representing the people loses all its meaning and becomes tantamount to confiscating a legitimate expression of the people's will. On this point, like everywhere else, there can be a little gap between the people and its representatives but not too wide a gap either. This should be the guiding principle for good governance.

Curiously enough, the mains players of this never-ending debate on the treaty leave us under the impression that they have just discovered that in France, a referendum can actually be used to serve the particular interests of the President. Some people are just too naive in politics... This is the reason why I am against a referendum, as a matter of principle.

In European politics, all the French referenda have had all but one purpose : to serve the European idea. President Pompidou was rather more interested in setting a trap to the Socialist opposition back in 1972 than in convincing the French that a greater destiny was now linking us to the treacherous Albion and other foes of the past. Years after, President Mitterrand was very happy to organize a referendum and witness the division of the Right in France: it was thought back then that the staunch defenders of French sovereignty were to be found only among their ranks. Little did he know: Mitterrand almost lost the referendum. Chirac did lose his. He had hoped that French Socialist Party would explode, which it did, but he did not expect to be one of the collateral damage. This kind of mistakes clearly shows that in France, Europe is in the end one of the many toys our leaders are more than happy to play with.

I also find it curious that no-one ever said to those calling for a referendum, that in fact, there will be one! One, which has been planned for a long time: the European elections of June 2009. Of course this will be a pan-European referendum and it will be called 'Elections to the European Parliament'. I find this to be a very valuable argument.

Oh, I know, the European Parliament is useless, but it has been reinforced and it will be reinforced in future! You see, many of its elected representatives have this very bad habit of taking their jobs at heart. The EP is the place where tomorrow's European democracy is being forged. And in order for that democracy to consolidate itself, it will require competing political projects. The European Union has a right to alternating its political majorities, just like any other modern democracy. It is therefore up to the French anti-liberal Eurosceptics to come up with such a project, and leave up to the people to decide: and yes, the will of the people will prevail!

Tags: blogger of the week, elections, Europe, France, left-wing, Lisbon Treaty, referendum, right-wing