François Delapierre était l'invité jeudi 5 juin d'un meeting de fin de campagne pour le "non" au traité de Lisbonne à Cork, la deuxième plus grande ville d'Irlande. Nos lecteurs anglophone peuvent lire le texte de son intervention.

Firstly I’d like to thank the representatives of the Campaign against the EU Constitution who have invited me to speak this evening in the City of Cork. They are doing an excellent job here all over Ireland, in big cities as well as in the smallest towns.

Before I go into any further detail I should apologize for the fact I can’t speak to you in perfect Queen’s English. Anyway, I’m not sure that it would be especially appreciated!

I’ve been a member of the French socialist party for over twenty years. I’m now a member of its National Executive. The “Parti Socialiste” is the French member of the European Socialist Party as is the Labour Party the Irish member of the ESP. We have different points of view about the new treaty within my party. I know it is the same case in Ireland, because I have met many members of the Labour Party who support the “no” in spite of the official stance of the majority of their party leaders.

As a member of the French Socialist Party, I was deeply involved in the 2005 referendum campaign in France against the draft Constitutional Treaty. As you know the Lisbon Treaty is practically a copy of the draft European Constitution. So I would vote “no” again… if only I had the right to.

But as you know I won’t have this right. France won’t vote again. Holland, the other country who voted “no” in 2005, won’t vote either. The countries that voted “yes” last time, Spain and Luxembourg, won’t vote this time. Even in countries where the governments promised referenda, such as Great-Britain, Portugal, Denmark and many others, the people will not vote. Every one of the 27 European heads of state have committed amongst themselves not to give the people their say. The Irish constitution is the only spanner in the works. Thanks to the Irish constitution, the Irish people will vote. This is a unique chance; and it is actually the last chance for the European people to have their say.

So the Irish people have a huge responsibility. This is an individual responsibility; it is the responsibility of each and every one of you. And it is a very difficult choice. Perhaps it puts you in an embarrassing situation. You never asked to be the only country to vote. I know that a lot of people in Ireland are still undecided. I understand this perfectly. The choice you have requires a lot of careful consideration.

With a much longer campaign in France and a very controversial debate, we had time for that careful consideration. Why did we French finally reject the draft constitution? Don’t trust our president. The problem wasn’t Turkey; the problem wasn’t the fact that that treaty was named Constitution. Sarkozy is a liar. He only wants us to swallow the same drink in a new bottle. But we still have a good sense of smell and taste.

We rejected the draft Constitution for two main reasons: democracy and social justice. And we would reject the Lisbon Treaty for the very same reasons.

Both issues are intricately linked. Political exclusion never encourages social inclusion. Officials who are not elected by the people usually don’t rule for the people. There is no doubt about that: if we want a Europe for the people, it has to be built with the people.

Obviously that wasn’t the case with the draft Constitution and it isn’t now with the Lisbon Treaty. This text was written by people who were not elected for that purpose. It was discussed behind closed doors. It doesn’t give the European citizens the power.

If there is one thing that I would like to ask of you, the people who are going to vote, it is that you please vote according to your personal appreciation of the text in itself. Not what people are saying about it, but what the text really says. Please don’t imitate your Taoiseach who publicly stated that he hasn’t read the text. The same man wrote a letter to you, saying that the Lisbon Treaty is “ good for Ireland, good for Europe”. But how can he know that without reading it? He actually doesn’t know. He is just betting that it is. Is this horseracing or politics? Apparently some of your political leaders love horseracing too much. May I suggest that your Taoieseach is betting on the Lisbon treaty with your money, because if he loses his bet it is not he who will pay the bill.

I have also read “yes” posters saying: “Europe, let’s be at the heart of it”. The heart, that sounds nice. But what about the animal itself? It doesn’t matter? Race to the bottom: do you want to be at the heart of it? Liberalization of health services: do you want to be at the heart of it? Iraq coalition and rendition flights: do you want Shannon to be at the heart of it? A new WTO neo-liberal agreement: do you want to be at the heart of it? Apparently Brian Cowen is ready to be at the heart of all of that. What does he write in his letter? “ One of the most important reasons why Ireland has benefited so much from membership of the European Union is that we have been positive members.” So, considering all of these issues, stay positive! Let’s be good guys, show willing. Don’t spoil the party! Barroso said that if you vote no, all of Europe will laugh at you. He should say that in fact all of Europe will laugh at him. So after the horseracing policy, please also think further than the “good guy policy” too.

I remember an American TV commercial made by a fast food company with a Scottish name. They were attacking the TV ad of a competitor. The commercial of this competitor was showing its nice restaurants, the soft seats, the good atmosphere, the friendly welcome… and then the ad was interrupted and a voice said “OK, but where’s the beef ?” So let’s now interrupt the Lisbon Treaty commercial: the heart of Europe and so on… OK, but where’s the beef?

Please don’t forget the beef. Read the text. Don’t be tempted to take other peoples’ words for it. Their opinions are certainly important. But that’s not the point. The point is what your own personal opinion as a citizen is.

This brings us to the first problem. A major democratic problem. Here is the Treaty. Just look at it. The official edition. 272 pages. With no pictures. 295 articles, not counting 12 additional protocols and 53 annexes. May I just read one of these articles to you? “ Paragraph 2, renumbered 3, shall be amended as follows: The following words shall be added at the end of the first subparagraph: ‘and shall comply with the Union's action in this area.’”. How can we be expected to read and to understand such a text? And you have to pay to get a copy of it!

Thankfully, I also have the consolidated version of the treaty. Here it is. The beef is getting bigger. Do you really think that the people who designed this treaty wanted you to read and understand it? Of course not. What can such an amount of paper possibly provoke apart from feelings of total inadequacy, and humiliation at being not intelligent enough to appreciate the decisions being made on your behalf by euro experts? This treaty isn’t designed to encourage citizens to get involved in European affairs. It’s designed to put them off.

I myself have tackled the text, but I had working with me a whole team of people who helped me with it. And I would like to give you my reasons for rejecting this treaty. My reasons, which will not necessarily be yours. Because my way of looking at it is a socialist and republican way of looking at it.

We socialists supported the European construction process in order to develop new and more efficient ways of promoting social and democratic progress. We thought that Europe would be the relevant scale to achieve high social standards and living and working conditions.

This is the very reason why we backed all previous European treaties. I personally voted for the Maastricht treaty back in 1992. But this time, we are being asked to approve the fact that Europe will officially abandon its social and democratic ambition. We would agree to wait a bit. We would agree to look for a compromise. We would accept to be in the minority. But we cannot accept being forced to give up our objectives. We cannot accept a Treaty that prevents us, even if we obtain a majority for it, from achieving our goals: social progress and democracy.

This treaty does just that. Let me prove it. With the text itself. I won’t read lots of long articles to you, otherwise this wouldn’t be a meeting but a punishment. But I will at least quote the articles’ references. Please note them down so you can check for yourselves what I am saying.

What about the harmonization of social policies? From a socialist point of view, this is one of the main objectives of the EU. But Article 153 simply prevents the harmonization of social policies! It bans social standards. Hence our socialist objective is officially ruled out.

What about the liberalization of services? Let me read you Article 60. It obliges States to “ undertake the liberalisation of services beyond the extent required by the directives”.

So, how can we promote social justice without minimum social standards and without public services protected from the so-called free undistorted market?

As far as democratic issues are concerned, here are just a few examples of how our democratic rights are trampled on. The only elected European institution is the European Parliament. But according to the treaty this Parliament would still be the only Parliament in the world which has no right to propose draft laws. Under the Lisbon Treaty, the Parliament has no authority on issues as strategic as the way in which the internal market operates. And if the Parliament wanted to reject the European budget, it would require two thirds of the European Assembly to do so. Would any European citizens accept such institutions in their own country? Would you accept such institutions in you own country?

What I would like to say in conclusion concerns the responsibility of the Irish people. The European governments know that people all over Europe disagree with these policies. Sarkozy himself said that there would be no referendum in France because otherwise there would be referenda in other countries and the “yes” vote would lose these referenda. He adds: there is a huge, widening gap between citizens and their governments all across Europe. And he’s right.

To bridge that gap, European leaders would have to change their politics. But they have chosen otherwise: they have built a neo-liberal fortress and locked the door. They put one, two, three, four locks on the door, and then they threw away the keys. The Lisbon Treaty tells us: we will carry on the same way. The neo-liberal policies will be sanctified. The people won’t have the power to change them. And there is nothing we can do about it.

But there is always something that can be done. The problem is, if the people cannot open the door, they will try to break it down. The Lisbon Treaty is weakening the European feeling. It is preparing the rise of aggressive chauvinism. Next year we have European Parliamentary elections. Chauvinists all over Europe could try to exploit the anger of bullied citizens. But on the contrary, these elections could also be a unique opportunity for the people to express themselves and to decide what they want to be put in the treaty. There is no hurry to adopt a new treaty in 2008, other than to prevent citizens from deciding on it democratically in 2009.

The path to European democracy is very narrow. We can hardly see it on the ground. Two years ago it passed through France. Now it is passing through Ireland. Please don’t let it disappear. Keep the road open. This requires a rare quality: bravery. Thankfully we know Ireland can prove itself to be very brave.