Democracy

Exactly, if you don't vote you shouldn't complain afterwards.
I always wondered if it wouldn't be better if the voting would have been mandatory as it is, for example, in Australia and other countries.

Different countries have different histories and different traditions - a banal truism, admittedly, but one with important applications. A country like Germany, through its past crimes against humanity, has acquired a particularly fateful burden. Its foreign policy is geared towards alleviating itself of that burden, e.g. by turning the Palestinians into scapegoats for Germany's past crimes against the Jews. A country like Ireland, itself a past victim of imperialism and colonialism, has no business shoring up this German strategy, therefore a shared common foreign policy with Germany is an anomaly that leads to significant injustices. Variations on this theme may be played in relation to France, or the UK, or Italy, etc. Therefore a "common foreign policy" is undemocratic on internationalist and not nationalist grounds.

Dear Mr. Mitchell,

As a young citizen who is quite passionate about politics and a law student who has studied European Union law I am very interested in the future direction the EU will be taking, and Ireland's position in it.

Thus, it may surprise you that I had been planning to vote No to the Lisbon Treaty (unfortunately travel plans interfered with my voting plans). This view has been shared by many of my concerned law school colleagues. Talking to fellow law students from France and Germany, many of whom are strong Yes supporters, I have managed to convey to them my sense of what is lacking in the actions of the EU.

But first to address your points:
"In my view, the real democratic deficit is at national rather than European level."

I agree on a certain level - engagement by local political parties/citizens in relation to the ongoing work is low (even in countries such as France and Germany as I've been told). Many citizens for example, do not know that a) we are now "citizens" of the EU never mind b) what citizenship brings about.

Who is at fault? Or rather, who can do more? Political apathy seems to be quite common in Ireland - nothing angered me more than the amount of people who could not have exerted the effort to read the (16 page?) pamphlet on the Lisbon treaty and deciding to vote based on some half-truths or mis-truths being broadcast at the time.

But the people cannot be fully blamed for this - engagement with the EU should not happen only when elections come about. Conversely the EU should not only advertise itself to its citizens when key decisions are going to be made. One of the greatest mediums of bringing us closer together has been the channel Euronews - I believe it is a great way of reinforcing the idea that we are all part of Europe and European events matter to us.

"The European Union is more open and transparent than the democratic system in Ireland."

That is a matter for debate I believe - the idea of direction representation and whether that constitutes the most desired form of democracy is one that can be argued back and forth again.

However, what it can "seem" like is that the council and presidency form an oligarchy of elites that hand down their wisdom to ordinary plebeians who either cannot comprehend the issues or do not want to. Of course I understand the parliament is steadily increasing its role within the framework of the EU.

This is why I am so encouraged by an initiative like this website - a forum that seeks to bring the EU closer to the people. This way - the people can see that EU ministers are not cruel/uncaring gods of a distant land and the EU can see that ordinary citizens can be trusted to give their ideas and opinions on matters that ultimately will affect them.

"Have you any ideas? Views? Fears? Here's a real opportunity for people to have a direct say on our shared economic and social future in the EU."

Here is the meat of the issue - going back to Lisbon. I had very little qualms with the treaty itself. And before starting my legal studies in European Union law I was a definite Euro-phile. However, as the legal course progressed and I saw how the institutions of the EU can be used not only to forge bonds but to destroy traditions and ways of life my steadfast support began to waver.

My problem with Lisbon is not what the text says, but what the action represents. Once more, we are given the impression of the secret covenant of ministers huddled in a room, planning the future of the EU and Europe. I ask - what is wrong with letting the people in on the roadmap of development? Are we heading for a United States of Europe? Do ministers think it is wise? Do citizens think it is wise? If we knew what the endpoint of this is then the treaties become far less controversial in character.

The EU/EEC/ECSC etc. has seen tremendous growth in the last few decades, and its roles has expanded from purely economic (though with an eye to preventing war) to now social, political and military roles. What does this mean for future development? The question of national identity and sovereignty is not one to be pooh-poohed and reserved only for the sensationalist tabloid papers. So much has changed in the last 30 years, what will the next 30 bring? And shouldn't the people get some say in that?

One thing I am confident of though - is that Europe needs to be together economically. To be able to compete against other trading blocs of the world we must act in a single voice on the market. But how far should we extend conformity in the other areas? I believe this matter is still very much up for debate, and unfortunately will have to continue lodging my protest in the most effective way I can (by voting no) until the EU addresses my concerns, or the majority of the people express no such reservations as I do.

I find it highly amusing that some people complain about rights being taken away by Lisbon when in fact Ireland lost sovereign control over those matters a long time ago in previous treaties (Nice, SEA etc.) - it just shows that were people more aware of the issues surrounding the previous treaties they may not have been as comfortable as voicing their support (effectively placing their trust in the government that it was the right thing to do).

Conversely, the fact that every major political party (apart from Sinn Fein) asked the people to vote yes, yet the majority voted no in Lisbon shows that that fiduciary trust has been eroded away. Especially by some of the equally non-logical arguments made by the yes side; that the EU has been good to us - yes, overwhelmingly so. However, when one is a true friend, they can be candid and give their honest opinion, even if against the wishes of a friend who has treated them graciously in the past.

I apologise for writing such a long and drawn-out response, however this was exactly the sort of mechanism I wish could be put in place to encourage communication between interested parties and I wish it every chance of being a success. I also apologise for the way this text has come out - it appears that paragraph breaks are not rendered correctly by this website.

Kind regards,
Daniel

I believe that young persons need to be educated at a very young age about democracy. This education needs to include a very strong practical element so that children see democracy in action. If we as a society do not consider democracy worthy of inclusion in the curriculum even in primary school then we should not subsequently be surprised that there is a democratic deficit. We live in a very complex world and it is not good enough to assume our citizens will pick up a good understanding of how democracy really works by the time they are eligible to vote. Apathy is often the result of lack of knowledge.
Secondly, the quality of democracy practiced in Ireland often leaves much to be desired. Our political structures and practices in Ireland mean that our most senior politicians are as preoccupied with constituents' day to day problems as they are with governing the country and legislating for a better future. The impression often received by our youth is of lack of relevance and low moral standards. This will not inspire our young people to take an interest and get involved.
In summary i believe we need to educate early and our politicians need to show good example by higher standards in public office.