AMID A sea of primary colours, and before an audience dressed in regulation jeans, T-shirts and designer glasses, Lisbon Treaty campaigners took their arguments to the home of Google Inc in Ireland yesterday for an interactive debate on the forthcoming referendum.
In an event streamed live on RTÉ's website from the company's European headquarters in Barrow Street, Dublin, a crowd of 150 employees heard advocates and opponents of the document tussle over its implications for democracy, accountability and climate change strategy in the EU.
Citing Taoiseach Bertie Ahern's observation that the treaty contained 95 per cent of what was in the abandoned European constitution, John McGuirk of the antitreaty group Libertas said the document was a slightly amended version of the one already rejected by French and Dutch voters.
He claimed that during the "period of reflection" that followed those referendum defeats, European leaders had detected a popular desire for a treaty to reform the union. "So they decided to call this a reform treaty," he said.
However, in his view, the EU was "in no way directly accountable to you as citizens", and its passage would "make it easier for the EU to take decisions which affect you."
John Bruton, the EU's ambassador to the United States, cited three areas in which the treaty would improve how the union worked. It would enhance democracy by giving more power over EU decisions to national parliaments, while the introduction of majority voting in certain areas would better equip the union to combat cross-border crime such as trafficking and the drugs trade.
Moreover, by introducing a single foreign representative and giving the EU a formal legal personality, he said, the treaty would make the union "more seriously effective in international relations".
However, the Green Party's Patricia McKenna, who is campaigning for a No vote, said the debate was above all about democracy. Ireland would lose out by having its own commissioner for only five in every 15 years, and while national parliaments could object to EU proposals, these objections could be ignored by the European Commission, she said.
On climate change, Ms McKenna claimed the treaty did not give greater powers to the EU, despite a "false, misleading" impression to the contrary being propagated by its supporters. Making the case for a Yes vote, Labour's Ruairí Quinn argued that problems such as climate change, trafficking and cross-border crime could only be dealt with by co-operation among European partners.
He argued that commissioners were accountable to national governments, while MEPs were elected by EU citizens. He urged ratification of the treaty so that the EU can perform more effectively on the international stage.
