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

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.