Assignment 3: React on an article

Opinion of Jochem Verheijen on the article of ‘The Sun’ on the ratification of the Lisbon treaty by the British government.

Article: "Britain betrayed as hated EU Treaty becomes law", published in The Sun on 04 November 2009.

As the title suggests, the article gives a view on the new EU treaty, and the British government that signed it. I will try to give comments on the article itself and on its content. I would like to start by saying I believe newspapers should not convey political opinions of their own. I believe newspapers should solely fulfil a reporting function. This means that, if they intend to give their opinion, they should sufficiently show and refute the alternative opinions. I believe The Sun has failed to do so in this article. For those who did not notice, the term “Euro-sceptic” certainly applies to The Sun. Even though, in my opinion, a sceptic should be a person inclined to question or doubt all accepted opinions, where The Sun solely seems to accept their own, and refrains from questioning the others. This lack of reasoning can also be found in hate, I find the term “Euro-haters” therefore more appropriate.

Obviously, the Sun must have its reasons for disliking the Lisbon treaty. A quote in the article calls the day the document was signed, “a bad day for democracy”. In my opinion, the Lisbon treaty gives an increase in democracy within the EU, especially when you compare it to its older brother. This is the result of, one of the biggest Lisbon changes, the increase in power of the directly elected European parliament. Of course, not hosting a referendum seems undemocratic. However, how can it be a bad day for democracy if the ratification will lead to an increase in democracy, even if it has not been democratically decided on? Furthermore, the decision to sign the treaty has been made by a government that has been elected. Because Britain only has two parties, the government always represents the say of the majority of the population.

Something that seems to concern the writers is the loss of vetoes on some subjects. I think a drop in vetoes will only make decision-making easier and less lengthy. It is obvious that no decision will ever have negative affects on any member state. All that vetoes add is the possibility for a member state to postpone a decision they are not really fond of. The subjects that will no longer be voted on unanimously will now be voted on using the treaty’s qualified majority voting system. Since this system is more democratic than most national systems, the drop in vetoes will not have negative affects for democracy within the EU.

I understand the ever so proud English are afraid of losing sovereignty. On the other hand, I believe the UK benefits from having a stronger Europe, and that this treaty will help creating that. And Britain: Don’t be tricked into thinking this treaty will make the UK “just a province of Europe”.