Posted on Mrs Wallstrom’s blog about the Irish Parliament’s report on the second referendum December 2008

7 jan 2009

Dear Vice President Wallstrom,
I am very happy to see your support for a proper understanding of European history and the integration process. Obviously the founding philosophy of Europe is essential material for politicians and for the general public. I have tried to give some of the primary history and the political philosophy on and Our own cherished ‘democracies’ have not always been good boys and girls when it comes to European democracy. I would also support the need for full and extensive explanation of the innovations the Lisbon Treaty and the practically identical Constitutional treaty. (Some of these innovations are highly destructive of the founding fathers’ democratic philosophy.) I would encourage the Commission to make proper analytical assessments of treaty innovations, especially those whose authors are unsympathetic to European democratic principles in the early treaties. A good start would be to describe how the original European democracy was conceived to work and develop.

The Commission sent a Communication to the Council about the Lisbon Treaty saying a full analytical explanation was necessary and a full debate. But no in-depth comparison of the two approaches (the founders’ and the Lisbon Treaty) was ever produced, nor was a real discussion on the treaties started. Instead the treaty was hidden in a list of amendments — which the authors said were designed to make the treaty NOT understandable. And then the Council refused to publish it in a final consolidated form {until ‘democracies’ ratrified this unreadable, unconsultable and unknown governance plan for Europe, a world economic superpower!!} ! It was said to be ‘efficient’ but in reality it was highly dangerous to change the original five supranational institutions in a direction that the whole economy lost its democratic controls and gave them to party machines. This is what the founding fathers said should be avoided at all costs! Dictatorships are efficient in one sense but not very wise. Undemocratic practice is also hugely expensive in the end. The Council’s obfuscation process and the Commission’s acquiescence really is a major disgrace in a Community of Democracies.

I hope in future that the Commission will not again let the Council get away with obvious falsehoods like rewriting of history. One recent multimillion-euro example was the campaign to make 2007/8 the fiftieth ‘Birthday of the EU’. Schoolchildren should know that it began with the Schuman Declaration on 9 May 1950 and the European Declaration of 18 April 1951. It would be good to start any information with the Commission’s explanation about what is ‘supranational democracy’ and the supranational Community advocated by the founding fathers (who re-established democracy in their own States after WW2 and supported the return to democracy of central and eastern Europe).

Is there any unit in the Commission that knows how to explain this? Where is the unit that should be pointing out the (1) the original concept (2) how national governments such as de Gaulle’s tried to kill it, modify it or chloroform it (3) that reasserts the democratic principles of the Community idea in the treaties and (4) reminds governments and civil society of their obligations in the treaties (5) corrects the historical errors in the Commission’s existing literature, video presentations and on There are many embarrassing moments when national governments took very undemocratic actions against the Community in the past. Commission information has too often taken the easy path and avoided anything that might embarrass Member States on their past bad conduct. Are we mature enough now to have a democratic discussion? An institution which willingly forgets its history is not worth much. Nor is one that does not know when, how and why it began! Silence is also a tremendous disservice to courageous Europeans who fought for European democracy and the rule of law against dictatorial politicians. The public is left with a total vacuum, not knowing either history or what are the founding democratic principles. How can they develop them for today?

The Commission is the key institution as no other government or parliament has such a body. Why did the founding fathers create it? Why did they insist that there should NOT be one Commissioner per Member State? There should be adequate info on this. The Commission is the key to Europe’s record of stopping war amongst themselves, and creating the greatest prosperity they ever had in history. Why has the Commission been so reluctant to defend its own independence given the abuses of the recent years?

My question for the Commission in the new year is: Does the Commission have the moral courage to stand up against undemocratic action of the member States governments? Will it say to the Council that it should be as open as the European Parliament (or national parliaments) in all stages of preparing legislation (and not have closed doors like a Supreme Soviet)? Will it insist that the Parliament is elected according to a single electoral statute as the treaties say since 1952? Will it encourage proper elections in the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions — as the treaties say that they should be democratic representatives of organized civil society? Will the Commission ensure that the Council respects the Court of Justice rulings?

With best wishes,

David Price

Author :


Comments are closed.