Rediscovering Europe in the Netherlands - St Antony's College ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

strengthening the legitimacy of dutch eu policy: conclusions and recommendations proposed (most recently by the Council of State) that the political primacy for Dutch eu policy be transferred from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to a position closer to the Prime Minister, namely the Ministry of General Affairs. Undoubtedly there are all manner of practical objections to such a suggestion which deserve serious attention, but the underlying message is crucial: eu policy is an integral part of general government policy and therefore fits in with the special responsibilities of the Prime Minister. However, this would do little to undermine the responsibility of individual ministers and junior ministers regarding the European dimension of their specific policy domains. Steps in this direction could be taken relatively quickly by allowing the Prime Minister to take on a greater strategic role in the present Cabinet subcommittee currently responsible for European affairs (known as the reiz-ea). In the longer term, a reconfiguration of Cabinet responsibilities could be introduced that would be more in harmony with the preparation, implementation and monitoring of the consistency of the main strategic lines of government policy in relation to the eu. As chairman of the Cabinet, the Prime Minister could then focus on the effective and energetic promotion of the main lines of eu policy in the Netherlands. The government would then be giving a clear signal to citizens, civil society organisations and the news media that the eu no longer belongs to foreign affairs but to the internal affairs of the Netherlands, and derives its legitimacy in part from Dutch political channels of representation and accountability. 159 7.3.3 preferenda Plebiscites in which citizens have more options than a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ vote (‘preferenda’) on eu issues may improve the political legitimisation process. There is no instrument more powerful for turning the legitimisation of eu policy into a public matter than a plebiscite. Given the persistence of the problems, an instrument as drastic as a plebiscite may therefore be justified. Moreover, plebiscites in the form of preferenda so that citizens can choose between a number of alternative proposals may circumvent some of the disadvantages of referenda. Both citizens and politicians could be stimulated to position themselves on a European issue, and as a result, both could end up having an influence on the decision-making process. If this instrument is categorically rejected, there is a real risk that the legitimisation of eu policy will remain trapped in a technical process, managed by specialists, in which there is no role for either politicians or Dutch citizens. Moreover, the public has ‘tasted’ this form of direct participation during the referendum on the Constitutional
ediscovering europe in the netherlands treaty. The issue is thus no longer just whether it should be possible to use referenda, but also whether their use – either across the board or specifically for European treaty reforms – can reasonably be ignored in the future. 160 The specific disadvantages of referenda are, however, substantial so that the question may justifiably be posed whether the cure is not worse than the disease. To some extent these disadvantages can be reduced if politicians and voters begin to get used to referenda. For the most part, however, they will have to be addressed by setting strict procedural conditions. These conditions must be designed to ensure that the mutual responsibilities of politicians and the public are guaranteed. Moreover, the parameters used must reflect the European context. This means that the contribution of citizens must be assured not only in relation to the available options, but also in relation to the question of whether there should be a referendum at all (e.g., through a civil initiative) and in the formulation of the options (e.g., through a citizens’ forum). Citizen input must also be guaranteed with regard to the effects of a referendum. This means that the outcome of referenda must be politically or legally binding, thus ruling out the possibility of ‘cosmetic’ participation. Politicians have a responsibility to provide information, to study the feasibility and effects of the various alternatives, but above all to position themselves clearly. The outcome of a referendum must also give politicians and policy makers clear guidance as to what strategies to pursue in the European decision-making process. An illustration of this are the plebiscites on Treaty revisions. A key disadvantage of a referendum is that it reduces an extremely complex issue to a simplistic ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ choice. Moreover, the outcome of a referendum does not come with an ‘explanatory memorandum’ from the voter, and is therefore difficult to interpret. Consequently, politicians often lack the direction needed to translate the outcome into appropriate action. The uncertain position of the Dutch government in the present Treaty revision round (what changes did they promote?) made this painfully clear. Moreover, within the European decision-making context, the moment at which a referendum is held is crucial. If a referendum allowing voters to say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to a treaty text is ultimately only held during the ratification phase (as was the case in most countries, including the Netherlands) citizens have little to contribute to the actual content of the text. A preferendum, which presents a number of substantive alternatives at an earlier stage in the decision-making process, does indeed provide citizens with that possibility, in the sense that the outcome will then constitute the government’s negotiating mandate.
Page 1 and 2:
Rediscovering Europe in the Netherl
Page 3 and 4:
The Netherlands Scientific Council
Page 5 and 6:
Cover illustration : © wrr Cover d
Page 7 and 8:
ediscovering europe in the netherla
Page 9 and 10:
8 rediscovering europe in the nethe
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
26 rediscovering europe in the neth
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110: ediscovering europe in the netherla
Page 137 and 138: 136 rediscovering europe in the net
Page 151 and 152: 150 rediscovering europe in the net
Page 159: ediscovering europe in the netherla
Page 181: Following the negative 2005 referen
show all

Rediscovering Europe in the Netherlands - St Antony's College ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?