SP International :: Goals

The debate on Europe is on its way!

When, in the spring of 2005, the Netherlands was thrown into confusion by the referendum on the European Constitution, I was lying in bed nursing a hernia, and thoroughly fed up. The work that I would have been doing in the campaign, with the SP calling for a No-vote, was, however, taken over in fine style by my parliamentary colleague Harry van Bommel. He quickly came to be the face of the voice of the progressive resistance to a megalomaniac constitution, a proposal behind which there loomed the spectre of a European superstate.

From my bed it was both reassuring and exciting to see that a 'no' to the proposed constitution could not be put down to Dutch narrow-mindedness or simple nationalism. On the contrary, Harry van Bommel and his fellow campaigners were succeeding in bringing more and more people over to their side, despite the furious and often amusing attempts by the Labour Party, Green Left and D66* to convince their supporters to vote 'yes'.

It was entertaining, as I lay in bed at home, to see also how the government descended into total panic simply because the people were not doing what it wanted. The more various ministers called down calamity and disaster on to the heads of the population should they dare to say no, the more people were persuaded that on this occasion to say no was the most intelligent thing to do and that a yes vote would mean taking an irresponsible risk. The cri-de-coeur of Premier Jan-Peter Balkenende, that he would look a fool in front of the whole of Europe if the Dutch people did not follow his advice, was for many the last straw. This was surely about something more than the honour or good name of a man who had all too rashly, at a ceremony in Rome, added his signature to the European Constitution, without giving any thought to whether his country's people actually wanted it!

On 1st June 2005 the people won a victory over both the government and the great majority of the Dutch political class. In the first national referendum ever held in the Netherlands, almost two thirds of the voters said no to the European Constitution, and the proposal was, following the sledgehammer blow dealt to it by the French no a few days earlier, consigned to its final resting place. Shortly after the Dutch people had said no, their representatives in Parliament said yes to a proposal from Harry van Bommel that a broad social debate should be organised on the question of how European cooperation might be reconciled with the people's desire to remain in charge of their own affairs and not allow themselves to be ordered around by Brussels busy-bodies.

The speed with which the proposal for such a broad debate was approved was matched by the speed with which real support for it ebbed away, with Dutch politics returning to ‘business as usual’, with Europe at best in the background. In addition, most political parties, traumatised as they were by the 'no' of 2005, were anxious to keep 'Europe' off the agenda, at least during election periods. Yet the question would not go away, even if only because at the beginning of the coming year Angela Merkel and the German government will take over the presidency of the European Union. Merkel wants to persist with the Constitution and the Netherlands will have to bend to this wish. We must for this reason remain on our guard and ensure that the no of 2005 stays a no in 2007.

European cooperation is necessary and inevitable. The Netherlands is no island. The European Union has contributed to our prosperity and can continue to do so – if we see to it that it is organised correctly. But a European Union in which the Netherlands disappears? To be swallowed up is not a form of cooperation! As long as this threat exists we must stay alert to it, and debate with anyone who is willing to do so how it could be better. This should also involve putting forward in a concrete fashion what we want and do not want in and with the European Union and Europe as a whole. I am pleased that this paper lays a strong foundation for such a debate. Because indeed – a better Europe starts now!

Jan Marijnissen

[ Summary - The debate on Europe is on its way! - European cooperation – a good idea - A more democratic Europe - A slimmed-down Europe - The size of the European Union - A fruitful agricultural policy - An affordable European Union ]