No Lisbon treaty “Yes”

Communicating a political argument as complex as the Lisbon Treaty earlier this year was a tough task

 

A complicated text can generate a multiplicity of interpretations: the authors of the Lisbon Treaty, 400-plus pages of dense text and sub-clauses, claimed its purpose was to stream-line the efficiency of the EU; opponents and critics read a raft of other meanings into it, including (but not limited to) a loss of tax privilege, enforced conscription and the old chestnut, bureaucracy for its own sake. Ireland, with its 3-million-strong electorate, was the only state with the right to veto the Treaty in a referendum scheduled for June 19. This placed the government under considerable pressure to secure a Yes vote, with all 27 countries needed to ratify the document for it to come into force. Ironically, Ireland serves as a prime example of the benefits that the EU can bring to a smaller country at risk of being overshadowed by its larger neighbours. Since joining the EEC in 1973, Ireland has received grant aid worth 40bn Euros, and a report published in February by Forfás, Ireland’s national policy and advisory board for enterprise, trade, science, technology and innovation, stated that the Single Market has been important both for the growth and diversification of Irish trade and for enhancing the attractiveness of Ireland for foreign direct investment. These material benefits, albeit offset by a recent cooling-down in the national economy, must have encouraged a sense of confidence in the communications campaign chiefs of Fianna Fáil, Ireland’s ruling party.

Launch

Fíanna Fáil launched their pro-treaty campaign on May 19, over a month after the various anti-Lisbon groups had started campaigning, which led many critics to argue that the party had allowed the opposition to gain a decisive head-start. Central to Fíanna Faíl’s message were the benefits derived from the EU. On launching the campaign, Taoiseach Brian Cowen – who had been in power for only a month - made it clear that, “It would be a very backward step to resign from the strategic political positioning we have established in 35 years of (EU) membership.” He went on to promise a ‘robust’ campaign that would involve all elected representatives, and would be “the most extensive referendum campaign undertaken by Fianna Fáil in many years”. The campaign’s main message was “Good for Ireland, good for Europe”, carefully insinuating Ireland’s interests first, although logically the slogan would make more sense when reversed – what is good for Europe as a whole is also good for Ireland. On their now defunct website, www.vote4europe.ie, the party listed five reasons why the Irish should vote for the Lisbon Treaty: the treaty would make the EU more democratic, give it a more effective decision-making system, would protect the rights of the union’s citizens more effectively, would better equip the EU and its member states to meet global challenges and would protect the interests of smaller states. By referendum day the party had held fifty public meetings and a number of ‘action days’ in constituencies. A series of press releases, for example ‘Yes Vote for Lisbon Treaty a vote for power to tackle climate change’ and ‘Yes vote in Lisbon Reform Treaty will continue peacekeeping tradition’ can still be found on the party’s main website. Flyers and posters were produced. A ‘Battle Bus’ - with a giant Yes painted in red on the side – was commandeered to travel the country in true political campaign style, transporting government ministers from town to town in an attempt to capture the popular grass-roots support.

 

Other voices

But Fianna Fáil were by no means a lone voice urging for a Yes vote. With the exception of Sinn Féin, every major political party urged their supporters to vote Yes. It also had the approval of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, the Irish Business and Employers Confederation, and the majority of the Catholic Church. The Labour Party, an opposition party, also launched its own Yes campaign. Enthusiastically led by their leader, Eamon Gilmore, their angle was that the reform treaty would strengthen the individual rights of European citizens and provide for greater openness and accountability regarding EU decision-making. Their slogan, “Yes to Europe; proud to be Irish,” was an attempt to reaffirm Ireland’s position in Europe and to offset claims by the No campaigns that Ireland’s best interests were outside Europe. Meanwhile, the main opposition party, Fine Gael, had started their campaign months earlier. A series of public meetings was held across the country, and they added to the body of literature distributed to voters, as did the Progressive Democrats, who distributed more than 250,000 leaflets detailing six reasons to vote Yes. Young Fine Gail also ran their own campaign, an indication of the attempt to court and engage the youth vote. Post-referendum surveys, however, indicated that the young were among the largest groups of non-voters. As a sign of the temporary political truce, Fine Gael’s leader, Enda Kenny, called for supporters to temporarily ‘hold their fire’ against Fianna Fáil, illustrating the across-the-board stance of the mainstream political parties to ensure a Yes vote.

 

Alliances

But any suggestion that voters would follow their political leaders was rebuffed by a chorus of dissenting voices from across the political spectrum, with several unlikely bed-fellows joining forces. Many commentators have noted the unlikely alliances formed in opposition to the ratification: alongside Sinn Féin, who believed Irish sovereignty would be compromised, were left-wing anti-war and anti-globalisation campaigners who claimed Irish soldiers would be pressed into a European army; conservative Catholics who insisted that the EU would usher in the legalisation of abortion were temporary bedfellows with pro-American free-market capitalists who set up a group called Libertas to defend Ireland’s low-tax pitch to foreign direct investors from the interference of an alleged Franco-German conspiracy. The official response by the main political players to the efforts of the No campaigners were variations on dismissals of the claims made, without substantial counter-arguments being produced. The admission by PM Brian Cowen and Commissioner Charlie McCreevy that neither had read the Treaty in full was seized on by the No campaigners. Post-referendum surveys show that a total of 53.4 per cent voted to reject the treaty, while 46.6 per cent voted in favour. Turnout was 53.1 per cent. Eurobarometer have suggested that among those who voted No were 65 per cent of all 18-24 year olds, 56 per cent of all women, 58 per cent of all unemployed and 74 per cent of all manual workers. Figures gathered by the Institute of Advertising Practitioners in Ireland show Fianna Fáil spent less on their advertising than Labour and Fine Gael, and that all three were outstripped by Libertas, whose millionaire founder, Declan Ganley, has ties with US defence contractors. While controversies about the undisclosed sources of Libertas’ fundings rumble on, the question remains whether the results of June 12 were a slap in the face for the EU, or the inevitable outcome of a confused and confusing communications campaign?