Sir,

 

High-risk instruments is how Tøger Seidenfaden qualifies the various referendums which have so far accompanied the ratification of EU treaty changes. He deems the very framework of referendums counter to democratic decision-making, especially when it comes to complicated processes like treaty reform. Referring to past experience in Denmark, Ireland, Sweden, France and the Netherlands, Seidenfaden maintains that, by introducing a variety of biases, referendums are fundamentally flawed. To redress the balance, he suggests an alternative mechanism involving the election of a group of popular representatives to be involved at the outset of negotiations.

 

It would be wonderful if Seidenfaden really could save us from referendums or any other intermediary devices which favour administrative or institutional solutions to cultural problems. But, alas, Seidenfaden’s proposal adds up to more of the same. It is yet another tragic example of dealing with deep-rooted cultural problems by semi-bureaucratic means. What’s worse, he does this quite explicitly. For when he says he isn’t claiming to resolve the so-called democratic deficit and the broader problem of day-to-day political legitimation of EU institutions, he misses the point. To people like myself, for whom these matters are at the heart of the current crisis, it is amazing to note how the need for urgency seems to escape him. A much greater sense of urgency should be induced by the realisation that binding reforms in the European arena can no longer be made without much deeper public involvement and commitment. Public engagement is not going to be stimulated by merely introducing another tier of peoples’ representatives (assisted by diplomats and “people in the know”), who like everybody else are human, all too human. However laudable it may sound as a partial contribution to our current difficulties, the idea of a new stratum of political representatives isn’t nearly enough to meet the challenges that face us.

 

For these challenges are cultural. Europe needs “soul”, and that requires greater efforts of education, more dialogue and indeed confrontation, moral clarity and the will to defend common aspirations.

 

There has been much criticism of the Dutch for holding a referendum on the constitution. While a strong supporter of the new treaty, I am proud that our referendum was held; not because I admire the instrument per se, but because it reminded us that there can be no democracy without a demos. That demos needs to grow from below, cultivated by education and by mature confrontation over issues and values. We have paid lip-service to the notion of a European demos for long enough; now we need to build it from bottom up as it cannot be dictated from above.